Use This or You’ll Lose That: Investigating Appropriate Psychological Theories to Market the Bogallme Tracking System.
Marketing/Advertising Qualitative (Thematic Analysis)
The Bogallme Tracking System is an anonymous ‘Lost and Found’ system which uses stickers with QR codes printed on them to facilitate the return of lost items. It is thought that the main motivations behind the purchasing of these stickers are fear appeal and loss aversion, as people fear losing their possessions and will do whatever they can to prevent this from occurring. This study aimed to investigate whether this is the case using focus groups consisting of primarily students - the target audience for this specific product. The research also explored Rogers’ (1962; 1976) Diffusion of Innovations Theory (DOI) in relation to this product as well as opinions regarding the product and brand. Findings suggested that all three of the above theories are relevant and useful in the development of this product and can be used to create an efficient marketing campaign whilst creating scope for further research which would benefit the development of the brand and product.
Methodology Participants. Sixteen participants took part in this study. Participants were recruited via opportunity sampling through various social media platforms and word of mouth. The age of participants ranged between 20 and 23. This age range was selected due to a market segmentation suggesting that over 50% of QR code users were aged between 18 and 34 and that 18 to 24 year olds were 36% more likely to scan them (14 Million Americans Scanned QR Codes on their Mobile Phones in June 2011., n.d.) Materials. The focus groups loosely followed a discussion guide (See Appendix D) which asked general questions corresponding to the product, brand and incentives as well as questions related to Fear, Loss Aversion and Diffusion of Innovations theory. The majority of questions within the Discussion Guide were open-ended as they encourage participants to express their views and opinions in full (Turner, 2010) and allow for any further elaboration. During the focus group participants were shown three potential names for the brand (Scannit, GlobalQR and the brand name Bogallme) and an example of the Diffusion of Innovations Model (Figure 1). Participants were each given prototypes of the product that they tested during the group and were allowed to keep these at the end of the study. Procedure. Focus Groups Focus groups were used as the method of data collection for this study. Although focus groups cannot provide data as rich as that of individual interviews, they can allow for group discussions. These group discussions and interactions allow for comparisons between participant experiences and opinions which could otherwise only be inferred after proceedings with individual interviews (Morgan, 1997). This study consisted of two focus groups which lasted approximately 60 minutes each. Within each focus group, eight participants sat facing one another around a circular table. After reading the information sheet and signing the consent forms, the focus group started with introductory questions to make participants feel more comfortable and able to voice their opinions. After this brief period, participants were asked questions which followed the discussion guide (See Appendix D), however elaboration was allowed and encouraged. Each participant was encouraged to answer all questions and to contribute to discussions as much as possible. Participants were also made aware that they did not have to answer anything that made them feel uncomfortable. Debrief sheets were handed out to participants at the end of each group and any further questions were answered. Analysis Both of the focus groups were audio recorded on an Edirol R-09HR recorder and then transferred to a computer so that they could be deleted from the device. Recordings were then transcribed verbatim using the app Audacity, with each participant being given an anonymous ID in case of withdrawal. From these transcriptions, thematic analysis was conducted using the software NVivo, which identified and inferred themes and opinions in order to draw conclusions regarding the discussed theories of Fear, Loss Aversion and Diffusion of Innovations. Other themes and inferences also came to light which will be outlined in the Results section.
There is no license suggested for this work as far as the research is aware.
Results There were several overarching themes present in both focus groups which relate to the three discussed theories (Fear, Loss Aversion and DOI Theory) and the proposed areas for exploration, along with new themes which were not previously considered. In response to the second objective relating to participant motivations to buy and use the product, the main theme of ‘motivations’ was created to investigate motivations to buy and use the product. Under this theme came the categories ‘fear’, ‘loss aversion’ and ‘adoption’. Following this, further sub-categories were created for each category which each included ‘effective’ and ‘ineffective’. The ‘adoption’ category under this main theme also included the further sub-categories ‘explicit’ and ‘implicit’. The category ‘explicit’ was based on what participants said outright whereas the ‘implicit’ category was based on inferences and implications from the discussion. The next main theme was created in relation to the first objective which aimed to explore brand and product opinions and was named ‘brand ideas’ and contained the categories ‘name’, ‘product idea’, ‘incentives’ and ‘other opinions’. For the final and arguably most significant objective, the main theme of ‘development’ was created which contained the categories ‘audience’, ‘barriers’ and ‘ideas’ which aimed to assist in making informed suggestions as to how to proceed with product development. Brand Name The opinions relating to the brand name were very clear: participants did not like it. After being presented with three options of a possible brand name with no previous knowledge not one participant deemed ‘Bogallme’ appropriate for the product. Not one participant worked out that the word ‘Bogall’ was an anagram of the word ‘Global’ and the majority of participants chose the name ‘Scannit’ as the most appropriate for both the product and the brand. Many participants also had trouble in pronouncing the brand name correctly and it was pointed out in the first group that some individuals may have trouble reading it. “It’s not compatible with my dyslexia that one! Not at all.” (PL: Age 22) “The other two also worked like internationally, you’d have to think about that as even as people who speak English we didn’t get that.” (SD: Age 22) Participants in both groups suggested that the name seemed quite childish and was trying too hard to be ‘down with the kids’ instead of being marketed at their age range. Another general consensus regarding the brand name was that it sounded similar to ‘Boggle’, the famous children’s board game, which again gave it a childish theme. “It’s like the game Boggle you used to play when you were a kid.” (GP: Age 22) Overall, it seems apparent that the brand name could have detrimental effects for the future development of the product. Product Idea Despite the brand name, after reading the product description, participants liked the concept of the product and agreed that it was something that they would use. “I need this in my life (laughs)” (EG: Age 22) The suggested uses for the stickers included: phones, keys, laptops, passports, luggage and notebooks. Participants said they were more likely to use the service in its current state (using Safari or another web browser) as opposed to downloading an app. However, some participants did have concerns surrounding the legitimacy of the product and would be wary when asked to fill in their details on the website. In terms of pricing, ideas of how much participants would pay for one sticker ranged from £1 to £10 with some participants suggesting that they would prefer to pay for a subscription service. The suggested subscription service consisted of paying a yearly fee for a certain number of stickers. “Yeah you could subscribe for like a year and you get five stickers and you could use it on whatever you want” (RD: Age 22) Despite this suggestion, many participants still disliked the idea of a subscription service and compared it to services such as Amazon Prime which continues to charge you if you forget to cancel it. As participants were all students or graduates, most liked the idea of paying per sticker best as it was affordable and not tying. However, another subscription idea came to light when participants were discussing potential problems with people forging the stickers. It was suggested that a subscription would include unlimited stickers and you would instead be paying to use the service as a whole. This would stop people from forging stickers because it would not be necessary once payment had already been made. “Unless, if you do have a subscription then surely you’d be paying the same amount anyway no matter how many… so why would anyone copy theirs.” (GP: Age 22) The issue of forging was quite a prominent topic within the second focus group. They suggested a variety of ways to overcome this: customisable stickers, laminated stickers and the creation of a unique QR code similar to that of Snapchat or Messenger. The idea of customisation was also popular in the first group. Several participants from this group said that they wouldn’t put the sticker on their mobile phone as it is currently for aesthetic reasons. They did however state that if the stickers came in different colours or were customizable, that they would be much more likely to purchase the product. “I’d say make them customisable. If you could design your own stickers that would be… To match your phone case you could be like ‘ooh I’ll have it black with rose gold’ and then it would match and look cute” (GP: Age 22) These participants did still agree that they would put the stickers on items other than phones, such as keys and passports, as it is not as important to participants for these items to be aesthetically pleasing. Stemming from this, the use of the stickers for travelling purposes was discussed in detail. Participants in the first group all agreed that it would be a useful addition to travelling supplies as the stickers could be placed on passports and luggage items. This was a very popular idea with the group for a number of reasons. Firstly, a passport doesn’t have the same sell-on value as a mobile phone, so you’d be much more likely to have it returned to you. Another suggested reason was the speed of having the item returned to you. If you are travelling across several different countries and using many different transportation methods, it may be difficult to continue without documents such as your passport and so a speedy return is very important. The final reason was that people often buy new products and innovations for when they travel due to excitement. “You’re just looking for stuff to buy when you’re going travelling as well, like ‘what do I need, what do I need’ so yeah I think that would work quite well.” (KR: Age 23) Fear and Loss Aversion When asked how they would feel if they lost an item, most participants described feelings of stress and anxiety along with anger. Not all participants had the experience of losing an important item, but all at least had a friend or family member who had had this experience. Participants suggested that the feelings they experience when losing something would make them want to return an item and that they would be more likely to return an item of personal over financial value. One of the main advantages of the product was discussed when participants compared the product to insurance. It was suggested that the product was a cheaper alternative that, although return is not guaranteed, is better than no back-up at all. In terms of product development, these findings suggest that there is potential to work with an insurance company to effectively market the Tracking System. “It’s kind of like an insurance isn’t it? Like for your phone so… I’d pay like a tenner if it was a one off because people pay, I don’t know, I think mine…well I don’t pay insurance lol but I think it’s like sixty pounds” (AB: Age 22) The time-saving of the product compared to insurance also produced positive comments about the product as it was explained how long it takes for an item to be replaced through insurance and how much effort this can be. “Also, insurance is like an effort, like you have to file a claim and then it takes ages for them to get it back but if you could just like message someone you like might get it today. It’s easier” (TM: Age 20) Another comparison to insurance was made in terms of the personal value of possessions. When discussing phones, participants pointed out that they’d prefer their original phone returned over a new phone of the same model as their original phone has all their photos, music and original settings on it which can often be difficult to retrieve if lost. “(Be)cause you’ve got your photos and everything…like everything is set up on your phone in the way you like it. I hate setting up a phone when you first get it and you have to download everything and set it back up again.” (GP: Age 22) Participants in the first group felt so strongly about the insurance aspect of the product that one attendee suggested that the brand partner up with a phone company and sell the product as an add-on for phone contracts. “You need to have a partnership with like a phone company or something so when people start getting new phones and upgrades, say you partnership with O2 and you have it as part of your package on your phone or something.” (DF: Age 22) Incentives The majority of participants stated that they would not require an incentive to use the service and to return an item and that empathy alone would be enough. Participants also suggested that the gratitude of the person who had lost the item could contribute towards them returning it. Some suggested that an incentive could add extra persuasion however it was quickly pointed out that there would be issues with monitoring any incentives. Examples of incentives discussed included: a lottery, money, and a points system whereby points could be collected to go towards a discount or a cash reward. Participants admitted that some of them would be likely to abuse the incentive as there would be no way to monitor whether people are actually finding items or are just working together with friends to make some money or have more chance in a lottery. Overall it was decided that any incentive would either be abused or would not encourage someone who was unlikely to return the item to return it. “Yeah it would’ve been such a good idea saying five returns gets you a free sticker but people literally will just get each other’s items and be like oh” (BC: Age 22) However, it is quite naïve of participants to expect all individuals to return items via the service with no incentive. They made good points surrounding the potential abuse of incentives, yet the use of incentives is not something that should simply be ignored because of this potential hurdle. It would be best to suggest plausible alternatives, such as the individual who lost the item having to pay an incentive to the returner in order to retrieve their item. Adoption When presented with the Diffusion of Innovations Model, all participants initially suggested that they would personally be in the centre of the model between Early and Late Majority or in the Late Majority. However, after asking what stage they thought they were at across different innovations such as iPhones and Apps this altered somewhat. From broader discussion it could be inferred that most participants would fit in the ‘Early Majority’ stage of the model as they would be more likely to buy the product if they could see it used successfully by someone else, but they also usually try new innovations earlier than the majority. “I was probably an early majority. I’d say I’m between early and late majority.” (GP: Age 22) “Yeah, I’d have to hear people like using it well, like see people all around using it” (RH: Age 22) When questioned as to the type of person that would be situated in the first two stages of the model, there was a variety of answers. In the first group the most popular answer was people in an older age group, with many participants describing the habits and behaviours of their fathers. “I actually feel like older people like my dad or someone, he’d totally buy into this” (EG: Age 22) They suggested that due to the simplicity of the product and its purpose, this would be the first market to espouse. Many were surprised by their own responses to this question as they initially assumed that the product would be more popular with a younger audience. The second group also agreed on an older audience, with suggestions of ‘overprotective mothers’ buying the product to protect their children’s’ possessions. The second group also indicated that, whilst they didn’t think that students would be the Innovators or Early Adopters, businesses targeting students would still be very interested in the product. “I think anyone who’s in the student-y industry. I reckon you could quite easily do this with like nightclubs. Anything to do with students people would want to get involved with.” (BC: Age 22)
Investigating the effects of dimensionality and referent variability on word learning in autism and typical development.
Dimensionality, referent variability, word learning.
The ability to learn words from pictures could give children another forum to develop their lexical understanding and vocabulary. This is particularly important for children with developmental disorders such as Autism. This research investigated how word learning processes (referent selection, retention and generalisation) in autism and typical development are influenced by learning from pictures and objects, including single and multiple exemplars of symbols. The participants in this study were 16 typically developing children, M age=3.68, the TD group was composed of 7 males (43.75%) and 8 females (56.25%). And 16 children diagnosed with ASD, M age=9.37, 8 males (50%) and 8 females (50%). Participants looked at pictorial and object referents. This was to differentiate whether there was a preference in word acquisition and retention, depending on the structure of the stimuli. It was expected that word referent selection, retention and generalisation would be more accurate in the object condition compared to the picture condition, as participants would not be relying of picture-word-associations. Participants also examined words paired with either single or multiple exemplars of referents, to determine whether multiple exemplars of shaped matched referents would promote shape-based generalisation in the ASD group, which has been shown to be impaired (Hartley and Allen, 2014). It was expected that retention would be superior when learning directly from objects in both the ASD and TD groups, which was found in this research. We also anticipated that labelling from multiple exemplars, rather than single exemplars, may scaffold more consistent shape-based generalisation. We found that referent selection was more accurate in both groups in the multiple exemplar condition compared to the single exemplar condition. The implications of this research are that we can further understanding of how symbols or objects benefit word learning, retention and generalisation in ASD or TD children. And whether there are any cognitive differences in the ASD and TD groups when it comes to word learning processes.
Participants The participants in this study were 16 minimally verbal children with ASD (M age = 10.42 years, SD = 3.29) and 16 typically developing children (M age = 3.64, SD = 1.64). Children with ASD were recruited from the specialist schools Dee Banks School in Chester, and Hinderton School in Ellesmere Port. Typically developing children were recruited via opportunity sampling, via the social media platform Facebook through advertisement. All the children with ASD received their diagnosis from a qualified clinical or educational psychologist. This was obtained using standardised instruments (i.e. Autism Diagnostic Observation Scale and Autism Diagnostic Interview—Revised; (Lord, Rutter & Le Couteur, 1994, Lord, Rutter, DiLavore & Risi, 2002) and expert judgment. Clinical diagnosis was confirmed for children with autism using the Childhood Autism Rating Scale (CARS; Schopler, Van Bourgondien, Wellman & Love, 2010), which was completed by a class teacher (Raw Score M score = 37.26, Raw Score range = 27 – 53.5). The ASD were tested for non-verbal vocabulary using the British Picture Vocabulary Scale (BPVS; Dunn, Dunn, Whetton, & Burley, 1997), which was conducted by the experimenter. Mean receptive vocabulary of children with autism was years 2.84 (range = 6 years – 2 years 4 months). Some of the children diagnosed with ASD who participated in this study were current PECS-users with impaired expressive language skills. Most of the children with ASD who participated in this study were functionally non-verbal (no spoken words), although, some produced speech of 1–2 words in length (however, much of this was echolalia) and one child could speak some short phrases over three words in length. Therefore, the sample was linguistically representative of children with ASD who receive and may benefit from picture-based communication interventions. Participants had 1–6 years’ experience of using PECS. When recruiting the children diagnosed with ASD, the experimenter emailed specialist schools, explaining the study and whether the school would be interested in participating. When recruiting the TD children, advertisements were put on social media platforms such as Facebook (see Appendix A). The information poster instructed the parents to contact the experimenter via email if they were interested in their child participating. The study was approved by the Lancaster University Ethics Committee and informed consent was obtained from parents before children were included in the study. See Appendix B for completed and approved Lancaster University Ethics Committee form Materials For the warm up test trials in all tests the participants were shown three familiar objects (for example; dog, bus, chair), these were small laminated pictorial symbols. In the picture, single and multiple exemplar conditions the participants were shown 12 laminated pictorial symbols, 6 familiar and 4 novel. The participants saw each novel symbol once and the novel symbol twice. Participants saw the same named novel symbols in the retention test trial, in this trial the named novel objects were shown to each participant twice. In the generalisation test trial, the participants saw shape matches (same object or picture, for example both would be paperclips) to the named novel objects from the referent selection test trial and retention test trial, however they were different colour variations (for example a red and blue paperclip). In the object condition participants followed the same test layout and number of referents as the other conditions, the difference being that the stimuli were actual objects compared to pictorial symbols. The words for the familiar stimuli were gathered using the CDI database (Fenson, Dale, Reznick, Bates, Thal, Pethick, Stiles, 1994) and appropriately aged matched to the non-verbal age range of the ASD children and the chronological age of the TD children (See Appendix C). The words for the novel stimuli were picked from the NOUN database (Horst & Hout, 2016), these were picked to all be two syllables long and words to have different phonological sounds per set. In the picture condition were, Gloop, Virdex, Akar and Teebu. For the novel words for the object condition were, Fiffin, Tranzer, Brisp and Pentants. For the single exemplar condition the novel word were, Tulver, Kaki, Jefa and Blicket. For the multiple exemplar condition the novel word were, Zepper, Toma, Modi and Chatten (see Appendix D) Objects were obtained through the equipment assistant at Lancaster University and purchased through amazon. Appendix E is an example warm up selection trial which a participant saw, and the response form completed by the experimenter. Appendix F is an example of a referents selection trial, which participant saw, and the response form completed by the experimenter. Appendix G is an example of a retention test trial a participant will have seen, and the response form completed by the experimenter. Appendix H is an example of the generalisation test trial which a participant saw, and the response form completed by the experimenter. All test trials were pseudorandomised per participant per condition and trial. Therefore, while all the participants will have seen the same number of familiar and novel objects or pictures. And each picture or object will have had the same name per shape matched object they will have been in a different order. Therefore, a different response form was required per participant, for the change in referent location and set order. Procedure Prior to the children participating the parents received, the information sheet (see Appendix I), and the consent form (see Appendix J). On the last day of experiments the experimenter brought the debrief forms (see Appendix K). Participants were test individually, in their schools for the children with ASD or in their own homes for the TD children, and were always accompanied by a familiar adult, teaching assistant or parent. The participants were seated at a table opposite the experimenter; the materials were placed within reaching distance of the participants. Children were reinforced throughout the session; correct performance was only reinforced during the warm up trial. The first test examined the picture condition vs the object condition, the second test examined single vs multiple exemplars. The tasks were between participants, as they were examining the results of the TD group compared to the ASD group, however for the analysis some within participants analysis was carried out to determine accuracy between test conditions (e.g. picture vs object). Each task always consisted of a warm up stage, referent selection trial, distracter familiarisation trial, retention test trial and generalisation test trial. The test trials were based on that done by Horst and Samuelson in 2008, with the extension of the generalisation trial which was not included in the Horst and Samuelson (2008) study. Picture Condition vs Object Condition Tests Warm Up Stage Participants were shown three sets of three familiar objects, in the object condition, in the picture condition participants were shown three familiar pictures. Participants were asked to identify each in turn, the warm up objects or pictures were pseudorandomised per participant, changing the order and location per participant per condition. The pictures or objects were removed and reordered after each set, and the participants response recorded. Referent Selection Trial Participants were shown four sets of stimuli (pictures for the picture condition and objects for the object condition) the sets of stimuli were different per condition, each consisting of two familiar items and one novel item, each set was shown four times, the novel referent was shown twice and the two familiar referents once. The order and location of the sets was pseudorandomised for each participant, the location of the novel object was never in the same location twice consecutively, and a novel or familiar object or picture was never requested more than twice consecutively. Sets were not presented twice in a row. Distractor Familiarisation To control for novelty or familiarity preferences in the subsequent test trials, children were shown all the novel objects that used in generalisation test trials. The new novel objects were a different colour variation of a previously seen novel object, which was named in the referent selection trial. Novel objects or pictures were shown against a previously named novel objects or pictures, which was not a shape or colour match to the new novel object. Objects or pictures were shown so one previous named novel object was shown against a new novel object or picture. The objects were not shape or colour matched, the objects or pictures were placed in front of the participant, they were not asked to identify them just to “look”. Retention Test Trial Retention trials will assess children’s memory of the newly-learned word-referent pairings. Participants were shown four sets; each set was shown twice with the target object requested twice. The sets were made up of three named novel objects, names were picked from the NOUN database (Horst & Houst, 2016), each made up of two syllables, objects or pictures were picked on the basis that participants items that would be novel to them, for instance gym or plumbing equipment. Objects and pictures which were not shape or colour matches to each other and were shown in the referent selection test trial. The order and location of each object or picture per set was pseudorandomised per participant per trial. The location of the novel object was never in the same location twice consecutively, and a novel or familiar object or picture was never requested more than twice consecutively. Sets were not presented twice in a row. Generalisation Test Trial Generalisation trials will assess children’s extension of labels to new items. Participants were shown four sets; each consisting of three objects or pictures, each set was shown twice with the target object being requested twice. The objects or pictures in the sets were shape matches to the objects or pictures shown in the referent selection, and retention trials, but different colour variations. All the shape matched objects or pictures were also colour matched to a non-shape matched object from the previous conditions. The order and location of each object or picture per set was pseudorandomised per participant per trial. The location of the novel object was never in the same location twice consecutively, and a novel or familiar object or picture was never requested more than twice consecutively. Sets were not presented twice in a row. Single vs Multiple Exemplars Tests Warm Up Trial Participants were shown three sets of three familiar pictures in both the single and multiple exemplar conditions. Participants were asked to identify each in turn, the pictures were pseudorandomised per participant, changing the order and location per participant per condition. The pictures were removed and reordered after each set, and the participants response recorded. Referent selection Trial Participants were shown four sets of stimuli, the sets of stimuli were different per condition, each consisting of two familiar items and one novel item, each set was shown four times, the novel referent was shown twice and the two familiar referents once. In the multiple exemplar trial, two differently-coloured versions of each unfamiliar object were named (one per novel trial for each set). The order of the sets was pseudorandomised for each participant. The order and location of each object or picture per set was pseudorandomised per participant per trial. The location of the novel object was never in the same location twice consecutively, and a novel or familiar object or picture was never requested more than twice consecutively. Sets were not presented twice in a row. The order and location of the sets was pseudorandomised for each participant, the location of the novel object was never in the same location twice consecutively, and a novel or familiar object or picture was never requested more than twice consecutively. Sets were not presented twice in a row. Distractor Familiarisation To control for novelty or familiarity preferences in the subsequent test trials, children were shown all the novel pictures that used in generalisation test trials. The new novel pictures were a different colour variation of a previously seen novel picture referent, which was named in the referent selection trial. Novel pictures were shown against a previously named novel pictures, which was not a shape or colour match to the new novel picture. Pictures were shown so one previous named novel referent was shown against a new novel picture. The referents were not shape or colour matched, the pictures were placed in front of the participant, they were not asked to identify them just to “look”. Retention Test Trial Retention trials will assess children’s memory of the newly-learned word-referent pairings. Participants were shown four sets; each set was shown twice with the target referent requested twice. The sets were made up of three named novel objects, names were picked from the NOUN database (Horst & Houst, 2016), each made up of two syllables, pictures were picked on the basis that participants items that would be novel to them, for instance gym or plumbing equipment. Pictures which were not shape or colour matches to each other and were shown in the referent selection test trial. The order and location of each picture per set was pseudorandomised per participant per trial. The location of the novel object was never in the same location twice consecutively, and a novel or familiar object or picture was never requested more than twice consecutively. Sets were not presented twice in a row. Generalisation Test Trial Generalisation trials will assess children’s extension of labels to new items. Participants were shown four sets; each consisting of three pictures, each set was shown twice with the target object being requested twice. The pictures in the set were shape matches to the picture shown in the referent selection, and retention trials, but different colour variations. All the shape matched pictures were also colour matched to a non-shape matched object from the previous conditions. The order and location of each picture per set was pseudorandomised per participant per trial. The location of the novel object was never in the same location twice consecutively, and a novel or familiar picture was never requested more than twice consecutively. Sets were not presented twice in a row. In the multiple exemplar condition the generalisation test trial introduced the shape matched referent in a third colour that was coloured matched to a referent of a different shape matched seen in the referent selection or retention test trial.
Assessing Inference Making in Listening Comprehension in Children in Special Education
Successful listening comprehension involves making accurate inferences to interpret the meaning of a story. We assessed inference making in listening comprehension of children in special education in years 4, 5, and 6 (n=12). Children listened to short stories and answered questions to assess local and global coherence inference after each story. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed no significant main effects for children’s first responses for presentation type (whole, segmented) and inference type (local, global). However, after children had received prompts a significant main effect of inference type was shown with children performing better on global than local coherence inferences. Correlational analysis revealed no significant correlations between IQ and inference type but there was a stronger correlation between verbal IQ and inference type than non-verbal IQ and inference type. An independent t-test revealed no significant effect of diagnostic group on IQ or inference type but children in the Autism group performed better than children in the MLD group on both IQ measures and the MLD group scored better on both inference types. We conclude that inference type is important to consider when setting and asking comprehension questions along with the use of prompts to portray and assess children’s full comprehension ability.
Participants The participants were 12 children from years 4, 5 and 6 aged between 8 and 11 (N=12, 3 girls and 9 boys, M=9.67, SD=0.99) from a special needs school in the North West of England. All children had a statement of special educational needs including; Autism, Foetal Alcohol Syndrome, Moderate Learning Disability, Nonans Syndrome, Fetal Vulprate Syndrome and Speech and Language Impairment. All children were verbal with English as their first language. Consent was provided by parents/ carers, the Head of School and each class Teacher. Measures IQ Task The WISC IV was used to determine children’s IQ levels. Children completed one verbal and one non-verbal measure of IQ. The verbal measure was a vocabulary task, children were first shown pictures of items and asked what this is, progressing onto words asking, what does this mean? Children could score either 0, 1 or 2 points depending on the accuracy of their definitions according to the WISC IV manual. There were 36 items, increasing in difficulty, and testing stopped when children answered 5 questions incorrectly in a row. The non-verbal measure was a block design task, this comprised of 14 items starting with simple designs progressing to more difficult designs. Children had to copy patterns either demonstrated by the experimenter for the first 3 patterns or presented in picture format for the following items. There were time constraints for each pattern starting with 30s progressing in length for the more difficult items to 120s. Once children had failed to complete 3 patterns in a row, testing ended. Listening comprehension task The listening comprehension task was taken from Freed and Cain (2016) devised by the Language and Reading Research Consortium (LARRC) (2015). The full set of materials comprised 6 short stories however, for the current study only 4 stories were used: Grandma’s Birthday, The Game, New Pet and A Family Day Out. The stories were all topics appropriate to this age group. There were 8 questions paired with each story assessing both local and global coherence inferences; 4 of each. With questions either asked throughout the stories (segmented format) or at the end of the stories (whole format). In 2 of the sessions, stories were presented in a whole format and in the other 2 sessions, the stories were presented in a segmented format. All the stories were pre-recorded by Freed and Cain (2016) and delivered on PowerPoint presentation on the researcher’s laptop to ensure consistent delivery of the stories regarding pace and word emphasis. All stories were available in a whole and a segmented format. The format in which children listened to the stories was counterbalanced based on children’s IQ levels from low to high. • Whole story format. Children listened to the full story and at the end were asked 8 comprehension questions. The delivery of each whole formatted story followed the same format. • Segmented story format. Children listened to the story in 5 segments. After each segment the child was asked either 1 or 2 questions with 8 questions in total. The delivery of each segmented story followed the same format. The average length of the story was 157 words, there were no pictures included in the PowerPoint which the story recordings were presented on. This was to avoid children using the pictures to help them answer the questions. Children were provided with verbal prompts if incomplete answers were given to direct them to the correct answer. If children were still unable to answer full knowledge checks were provided, see Table 1. All prompts were pre-written to ensure all children received the same level of prompting. Procedure Pre-test The IQ assessments were implemented individually in a quiet room in two separate sessions. Each session lasted between 10 and 15 minutes depending on how many questions/ trials they completed. First children completed the vocabulary test then in a separate session completed the non-verbal measure, block design. Main assessment Children were presented with 4 short stories on 4 separate occasions, each story paired with 8 questions. Each story had to be completed in a separate session due to the attention and engagement levels of the children being tested. Each session lasted approximately 10 minutes depending on children’s accuracy and speed of answering. The procedure was explained to the children at the beginning of each session using a script to ensure consistency. They were informed that they would either be asked questions throughout the story or at the end of the story.
Neural response to infant-directed speech: gamma band oscillatory activity in 4-month-old infants
Infant-directed speech; neural response; EEG; gamma oscillation
Infant-directed speech is an ostensive signal preferred by infants over adult-directed speech. We studied infants’ neural response to auditory stimuli by measuring gamma band oscillatory activity over the frontal area of the brain in response to ostensive infant-directed speech and non-ostensive adult-directed speech. Two groups of 4-month-old infants were presented with the same auditory stimuli, but the two groups differed in terms of visual stimuli (inverted vs. upright faces), being our study a part of a broader research project. We investigated only the auditory portion of the trial. We found that, in the inverted face group, the activation to the ostensive infant-directed speech was significantly enhanced while, in the upright group, this outcome was not found. These findings support the use of gamma band oscillations in assessing the basis of social communication and establish infants’ early specialization in understanding communicative signals directed to them.
Experimental Design We used data that had already been collected for a broader study, designed for the observation of the influence of auditory stimuli on face processing. In the main experiment, a total of 36 four-months-old infants was divided into two groups that differed on the visual stimulus presented at the end of each trial. Immediately after an auditory stimulus in IDS or ADS, the first group was presented with inverted faces, while the second group was exposed to upright faces. Participants in both groups were thus exposed to the same auditory stimuli, just before being presented to the visual stimuli, that were different depending on the group. In this research we focused only on the auditory portion of the trial, where participants were exposed to IDS or ADS (Fig. 1). Figure 1. Representation of the complete trial presented to infants. In every trial, 18 infants were presented with upright faces, while the other 18 were presented with inverted faces. However, each infant was exposed to auditory stimuli in ADS or IDS, regardless of the visual stimulus. The green rectangle shows the portion of the trial analysed in this dissertation. Participants Infants were recruited from the Lancaster Babylab database. All were free of any known neurological, ocular or auditory abnormality and met the screening criteria of normal birth, born full term (gestational age >37 weeks), in the normal weight range (>2500g) and with an Apgar score of at least 8 at five minutes after the birth. In our study we focused on infants’ neural response to the auditory stimuli (Fig. 1). However, the distinction between the two groups was preserved in order to observe possible differences between them. The group exposed to inverted faces included 18 infants (5 females, age range 117 to 161 days, M= 135.61 days). Thirteen additional infants were excluded owing to an insufficient number of artifact free segments (n=10), sleep (n=1), and technical issues during the experiment (n=2). The group presented with upright faces included 18 infants (5 females, age range 115 to 171 days, M= 145.22 days). 17 additional infants were excluded because of an insufficient number of artifact free segments (n=14) and technical issues during the experiment (n=3). In the final datasets (N=36) were included infants that provided artifact-free EEG recording in at least 10 trials within each experimental condition. Stimuli The auditory stimulus was the word “Hello” pronounced by a female voice using two different intonations: either IDS or ADS. The two words were recorded and edited with Audacity (v. 1.2.5) and Praat (v. 5.1) by setting a digitalization at 32-bit resolution and a sampling rate at 48 kHz. Both words were 850 ms long. The IDS stimulus had an average volume intensity of 61.86 dB, while the ADS stimulus had an average volume intensity of 61.50 dB. Apparatus Infants’ behaviour was video recorded for the entire duration of the test by a remote-control video camera placed behind the monitor. A pair of computer speakers situated behind the monitor were used for the presentation of the auditory stimuli. The infants’ EEG was recorded at a sampling rate of 500 Hz using a 124-channel Hydrocel Geodesic Sensor Nets (Electrical Geodesic Inc., Eugene, OR, USA). Procedure Infants sat on their parent’s lap at a distance of 70 cm from a computer monitor. Each trial started with a dynamic fixation grabber at the centre of the monitor, for the duration of 2150 ms. Then the attention grabber stopped moving and the auditory stimulus (in IDS or ADS) was released by loudspeakers positioned behind the monitor and lasting 850 ms. The attention grabber remained still for an interval randomly varying between 200 and 400 ms. Then the grabber disappeared and the visual stimulus was presented for 1000 ms. A blank screen as an inter-trial interval between 1000 and 1200 ms was inserted between successive trials. Auditory stimulus in IDS or ADS were presented in a random order with the following constraint: no more than three successive trials of the same kind in a row. The trials were presented as long as the infants were willing to look at them. When they became fussy, the experimenters played a dynamic spiral together with an attractive sound. The session ended when the infant could no longer be attracted to the screen. EEG measurement and data analysis The electrical potential was band-pass filtered between 0.3-100 Hz. The filtered EEG was then segmented into epochs including 600 ms before stimulus onset and 1400 ms following the stimulus onset for each trial. EEG epochs containing artifacts caused by body and eye movement were automatically eliminated, whenever the average amplitude of a 80 ms gliding window exceeded 55 µV at horizontal Electrooculogram (EOG) channels or 150 µV at any other channel. In addition to automatic rejection, each individual epoch was visually inspected for further epoch selection. When <10% of the channels contained artifacts, the contaminated channels were replaced by mean of spline interpolation, while segments in which >10% of the channels included artifacts were rejected. Infants exposed to upright faces contributed on average 17.5 artifact free trials to the IDS condition (range: 8 to 36) and 18.34 trials to the ADS condition (range: 9 to 39). Infants exposed to inverted faces contributed on average 20.89 artifact free trials to the IDS condition (range: 8 to 38) and 20.78 trials to the ADS condition (range: 10 to 39). In the artifact free segments induced gamma-band oscillations were uncovered through time-frequency analysis. These segments were imported into Matlab® and re-referenced to average reference through the free toolbox EEGLAB (v. 9.0.5.6b). The custom-made scripts collection WTools (available at request) was used to compute complex Morlet wavelets for the frequencies 10-90 Hz with 1 Hz resolution. A continuous wavelets transformation of single trials of EEG in each channel was performed, on 2000 ms long segments (600 ms pre-stimulus onset and 1400 ms after stimulus onset). The transformed segments were averaged for each condition separately. To remove the distortion in the time-frequency decomposition caused by convolution with the wavelets, 400 ms at each edge of the epochs were chopped, leaving a segment from -200 to 1000 ms around the auditory event. The average amplitude of the 200 ms pre-stimulus window was used as the baseline and was subtracted from the whole segment at each frequency. Based on prior findings (Parise & Csibra, 2013), we selected the scalp location over the forehead (the average of channels 3, 9, 10, 15, 16, 18, 22, 23, corresponding to Fp2, Fpz, Fp1, respectively, Figure 2), a time window from 200 ms to 600 ms, and 25 to 45 Hz frequency window. In order to verify that there were no significant differences between the accepted segment for each participant, a t-test between the average of accepted segments for each condition (speech) was performed and the same procedure was repeated for each group (face orientation). The mean amplitude was assessed by a repeated measure ANOVA with Speech (IDS x ADS) as a within subject factor, and Group as a between subject factor (upright x inverted). Paired-Sample t-tests were used for post hoc comparisons between the induced gamma-band oscillatory activity in response to IDS and to ADS. One-sample t-tests against 0 were used to assess whether the analysed gamma-band oscillatory activity differed significantly from the baseline. Figure 2. Sensor layout for the Electrical Geodesics Inc. (EGI) 124-channel hydrocel sensor net, showing the locations of the electrodes under study (circled in green), averaged for measurement of the oscillatory activation.
How does metaphorical language affect individuals’ aesthetic perception in modern poetry: In the life span view
Beauty perception Metaphoricity Familiarity Imageability
This study examined the relationship between the degree of metaphoricity and beauty perception as well as between cognitive load and beauty perception, by controlling for other possibly confounding variables such as familiarity and imageability. While previous research has shown that the variables of metaphoricity, familiarity and imageability influence beauty perception, no study investigate how the degree of metaphoricity and cognitive load influence beauty perception in poetic sentences reading. Therefore, this study aimed to bridge this gap. Beauty rating scale and keypress experiment were conducted, involving 22 young adults and 18 elderly adults. Because of the collinearity among metaphoricity, familiarity and iamgeability, a new variable called interpretation of metaphors was used to explain the hypotheses in the present study. Rather than cognitive load, interpretability was the predictor of beauty perception in poetry sentences reading. Young adults’ beauty perception achieved to the highest point at novel metaphors, while elderly adults considered dead metaphors as the most beautiful stimuli. This study suggests that poetic sentences are generally perceived as more beautiful when its degree of interpretability is lower in young adults rather than elderly adults. These findings provide an initial implication for future longitudinal or neuroaesthetic studies to further the understanding between metaphorical language and beauty perception.
This study has been approved by the Psychology ethics committee at Lancaster University on 24/04/2018. Besides, this study were preregistered in ‘AsPredicted’ website, and the number was 11034. Participants. The participants were 22 young adults between the ages of 18 and 30, and 20 elderly adults between the ages of 55-75. They were recruited from SONA systems, social media (e.g., Facebook advert). All young participants have not suffered from any learning disability (i.e., dyslexia) and they were native English speakers. However, two elderly participants confirmed that they had a history of dyslexia, so they were excluded. Finally, there were 22 young adults with a mean age of 21.64 years (SD=3.05) and 18 elderly adults with a mean age of 63.22 years (SD=6.07) have participated. Participants were required to give informed consent via an online consent form before completing the online survey, and they would fill in a paper version consent form before the keypress experiment. All participant would receive four pounds after finishing all experiments. Materials. Stimuli. A bank of 92 stimuli, was generated by a previous student who was previously supervised by Dr Francesca Citron. Partially sentences are excerpted from modern poetry. The remaining sentences were created by this student, inspired by other poetic works. Creating novel sentences was to decrease the deviation caused by participants being familiar with some stimuli. All stimuli were divided into five categories, and the degree of metaphoricity of these categories was increasing. The first one is the literal expression which has concrete and pragmatic meaning and it usually equal to its literal meaning. It is not part of the metaphorical language. The following category is dead metaphors – a kind of metaphor that lose its imaginative space because of frequent use (Punter, 2007). The third one is the conventional metaphor that is commonly used in everyday life, and it is highly related to the specific culture. The fourth one is novel metaphors which is usually unusual in everyday life and challenging for the layperson to understand. The last category is extremely novel metaphors which are the most abstract and challenging. The semantic category overlap of subject and predicate in these sentences is less obvious than other categories. Considering the potential fatigue of the elderly participants, the researcher randomly selected 50 stimuli from the original stimuli bank as experimental materials (See Appendix A). There were ten sentences for each category. All stimuli were given a specific code for identification in the analysis procedure. The creator of the stimuli bank has invited 85 participants to rate the degree of metaphoricity for each stimulus via a 7-point Likert scale (1 for the minimum and 7 for the maximum). The result has shown that the degree of metaphoricity was increasing as the original design (See Figure 1). Figure 1. Scatterplot showing the trend of metaphoricity ratings of stimuli. The categories corresponding to the stimuli number as follows: literal sentences (1-14), dead metaphors (15-28), conventional metaphors (29-53), novel metaphors (54-75), and extremely novel metaphors (76-92). Apart from metaphoricity, these stimuli have been tested on multiple sentence-level characteristics, including familiarity and imageability in the same group of participants. Briefly, all ratings were collected by asking participants to rate "how familiar is this sentence to you?" and "how easy is it to imagine this sentence?" on two separate 7-point Likert scales. These raw data would be used for analysis in this study. Survey. Beauty rating scale was designed as a 7-point Likert scale via the online survey software ‘Qualtrics’. The scale included a digital version of the information sheet, consent form and debrief form, and it also investigated several basic information like age, biological sex and reading frequency (Appendix B). More importantly, the scale included the questions for checking whether the participants are British native speakers and whether they have had the history of learning disability (i.e., dyslexia) since these factors can influence the beauty ratings. In the formal test, 50 stimuli would be randomly presented to the participants through Qualtrics. Participants would see the poetic sentences, as well as the question ‘How beautiful is this sentence to you?" on the page. They need to give their responses by rating from 1 to 7(1 for not at all beautiful and 7 for extremely beautiful) for each sentence. Experiment. The researcher created a keypress experiment on ‘Presentation neurobehavioral system’ software. The material were identical to the online survey and included extra four filler sentences, five odd sentences, four questions related to the poetic stimuli. All new stimuli were generated by the researcher, but they would not be analysed eventually because of their functions (Appendix A). Filler sentences were used to let participants practice how to give their responses by the keypress. Odd sentences were unreasonable, and they were used to avoid the mechanically repeated responses. Similarly, some poetic stimuli would be followed by a question for checking whether participants have answered the question seriously. To ensure the randomness of the experimental materials, six versions of the experiment were created. Participants would be asked to read each sentence once at a time and to evaluate whether it was sensible for them by pressing a button (“F” for indicating “Yes” and “J” for indicating “No” via keyboard). Because wanting to avoid the habitual reaction caused by the participants being familiar with the traditional key press experiments, we also created six corresponding flipped version of the experiment. Overall, this experiment has 12 version, and they would be randomly allocated to the participant. Participants would take part in the experiment on the researcher’s computer, whereby the answer and the reaction time of each sentence would be collected by Presentation automatically and anonymously. Procedure. Questionnaire. When the participants decided to participate in the project, the researcher would send an anonymous questionnaire link to the participants by e-mail. The questionnaire can be completed on any electronic device, and the participants could pause the questionnaire at any time when they need a break. After clicking the link, the participants would read the information sheet and the electronic consent form orderly to ensure that they understood the necessary information of the questionnaire and gave their consents. They then need to answer ‘check questions’ to check whether they were native speakers and whether they have a previous or current learning disability. Knowing the answers to these questions was to confirm that the participants were suitable for the questionnaire. Subsequently, the demographic information would be asked, and all answers would be kept confidential. After, a brief instruction form would be presented to explain the basic operations of the questionnaire and some important terms (e.g., beauty) involved in the questionnaire. Then, 50 poetic stimuli which were varied in the degree of metaphoricity would be presented randomly, followed by a question after each stimulus: How beautiful is this sentence to you. Participants should give their responses by rating from the 7-point Likert scale (e.g., 1 for not at all beautiful and 7 for extremely beautiful). All answers would be automatically recorded by Qualtrics. After completing all, the participants would read the debrief sheet to understand the purpose and the design of this questionnaire. Also, the references about this questionnaire and the contact information of the experimenter would be given. When the participants completed the questionnaire, they would receive an e-mail from the experimenter to make an appointment for the keypress experiment. Time for the experiment was usually one or two days after completing the questionnaire. Keypress experiment. All participants were required to meet the experimenter personally to complete the keypress experiment. Before the experiment began, participants were required to sign on the paper version of the consent form. After that, the experimenter would verbally explain the operation of the experiment. Then, the experimenter would randomly select one of the twelve versions of the experiments and give the participant a unique code. Participants were asked to evaluate whether the sentences presented on the screen were reasonable at the time. When they think it was sensible, they need to press the button that represents ‘Yes’, and vice versa. When they need to answer the ‘Yes/No’ questions, the operation was the same. When the participants understood the operation, they would press F or J key to start the experiment. Before the poetic sentence was presented, there would be a white fixation cross in the center on the black screen, and the duration was 1000ms. Then, the stimulus would present on the screen and last for 8700ms. Usually, the participants need to give their responses during this period, and their reaction time was automatically recorded by the software. After the presentation of a stimulus, it would be followed by a blank screen that lasts for 300ms with a white jittered fixation cross before the next sentence/question was presented. If the subject answers the question at this time, their reaction time of this stimulus will be the reaction time during this period plus 8700ms. The font for all stimuli was 12, the font colour was white, and the background screen was black.
Visual engagement with different animals
Animals, dichotomization, eye-tracking, empathic gaze, guilt
People treat animals differently depending on how they are dichotomized.The present study tested the consequences of dichotomization on our visual engagement with still images of different animals. Fifty-seven participants took part in two identical image visualization tasks, the first preceded a short empathy inducing video,and the second followed. We used eye-tracking to study dwell time percentage oriented towards the eyes of companion, farmed and endangered animals. Eye-directed visual engagement was greatest for companion animals in the first image visualization task. This bias in visual engagement towards companion animals was attenuated in the second image visualization task.We hypothesised that the empathy inducing video would change gaze towards farmed animals, evidencing either increased attentional avoidance or increased engagement. Although mean averages suggest a slight increase in visual engagement following the video, this difference was not significant. Participants reported highest levels of negative emotion regarding the farmed animal’s videos. Empathic gaze with farmed animals correlated positively with participants’ level of meat consumption restriction. The findings support several pre-registered hypotheses but disconfirm others, and are discussed in terms of the extension of empathic gaze to animals.
Participants Our pre-registered recruitment strategy was to collect fifty participants with complete data. Fifty participants were recruited through (1) Lancaster University’s research participation system, SONA or(2) poster advertisementand were paid £3for their involvement. Each participant saw 9 images, presented twice, each for 10 seconds, totaling 180 seconds of eye-tracking data. On first inspection of the data we were forced to exclude seven participants whose eyes had not been tracked for 50% of the experiment. To reach our pre-registered participant pool of 50 we recruited seven more participants, one of whom had to be excluded on the same grounds as previous. Our final data set was comprised of 49 participants, 36 females and 13 males. Age ranged between 18 and 30 (M= 21.10, SD= 2.13). Participants reported a range of nationalities, including: American (n=1), British (n=28), Bulgarian (n=3), Chinese (n=3), Croatian (n=2), German (n=2), Hungarian (n=2) Indian (n=3), Indonesian (n= 1), Latvian (n=1), Nigerian (n=1), Malaysian (n=1) and Slovakian (n =1). Participants dietary classifications were as follows:Meat lover(n =1), Omnivore (n =23), Semi-vegetarian (n =16), Pescatarian(n =3),Lacto-or Ovo-vegetarian(n =5), Strict vegetarian(n =0), Dietary vegan(n =0),andLifestyle vegan(n =1).Design The experiment employed a 3x2 fully within-subjects design. The independent variables were animal category and time. The variable animal category hadthree levels: farmed animals (sheep, cow, pig), companion animals (dog, cat), and endangered wild animals (chimpanzee, tiger, koala) and was operationalized using still images. Our main research interest was the distinction between farmed and companion animals, given the marginalized status of farmed animals in society and the privileged status of companion animals. Endangered animals are vulnerable to human interference and confer some value VISUAL ENGAGMENT WITH ANIMALS.4due to their endangered status, but they are not actively used by humans as objects of consumption. For this reason, endangered animals were used as a control or comparison group. The variable time had two levels, pre-and post-video task. Participants took part in two IVT, one before a video watching task and one after. Our main dependent variable was dwell time percentage on the eyes of the animal. This was recorded during the presentation of each of the nine images in both IVT. At no other point in the experiment were eye-movements recorded. Additional outcome measures.We recorded the participants emotional state immediately after the video watching task. Participants emotion ratings were transformed into numerical valuesas follows: Extremely positive (+3), Fairly positive (+2), Slightly positive(+1), Neutral (0), Slightly negative (-1), Fairly negative (-2) and Extremely negative(-3). As a result, more negative responses were represented by a more negative value. We asked participants if they(Yes/No) contribute to the suffering and well-being of each animal category. Participants were also asked to state their agreement (Yes/No) with two statements, the first regarding their outrage having heard about the harm inflicted on animals, and the second about the animal’s capacity to suffer as being meaningfully similar to a human’s capacity to suffer.However, due to an experimenter error, these four measures were not recorded by the experiment-analysis system, and therefore cannot be discussed further.MaterialsImages. In total we sourced nine images, three for each animal category in our design. We sourced images for three different species of animal to make up our target category. The companion animal category was the only exception to this rule. For this category of animal, we used two dog images (Siberian Husky and Staffordshire Bull Terrier) and one cat image. In our original companion animal category, we had considered using the VISUAL ENGAGMENT WITH ANIMALS.5image of a horse, but decided against this for two reasons. Firstly, the composition of the face was noticeably different in comparison to the other eight images. The horses face was longer with its eyes positioned laterally. Secondly, the category in which horses fall in to (i.e. farmed or companion) is often blurred. Whilst cows pose similar facial composite issues tothe horse, there is no question that cows are members of the farmed animal category. We decided that this justified the inclusion of the cow in the experiment, but we could not justify the use of the horse. The original source for each image is displayed in Appendix A.Due to limited financial resources we were restricted to the use of free, open-source images. This meant that the images contain some background colour and contextual inconsistencies. Nonetheless, all images share these same consistencies: forward facing gaze, minimal to no background noise and the absence of other animals. We adjusted some of the images so that the body of the animals is mostly cropped out. As a result, all nine images have a central focus on the animals face. We ensured that the images did not objectively indicate animal harm nor confinement. Finally, all animals were adult so as to avoid the baby schema effect–the finding that infantile features promote caregiving behaviour(Archer & Monton, 2011; Borgi, Cogliati-Dezza, Brelsford, Meints & Cirulli., 2014; Fridlund& MacDonald, 1998). This was an important consideration as the baby schema effect has been linked to stronger caregiving motivationswith animals(Piazza, McLatchie & Olesen, 2018).Videos. Three videos were selected to induce empathic concern with each of the three animal categories. Each video targeted a specific class of animal (companion, farmed, or endangered) and was presented prior to the second viewing session. All three videos outlined the harm inflicted upon the relevant animal category. They include emotional but not graphic content and were selected for their empathy arousing nature. To reduce any variation caused by the different music styles of the videos, all audio was removed. Videos were trimmed to VISUAL ENGAGMENT WITH ANIMALS.6ensure that they had a similar duration time. Supplementary details of each video can be found in Appendix B. Additionally, each video can be accessed in the “Materials” section of our OSF file. Stimuli presentation. All stimuli werepresented on a Windows 10 Pro hplaptop which had a 14-inch monitor, a screen resolution of 60 Hz and the Intel® Core™ i7-4710MQ CPU processor. Stimuli ran semi-automatically. The experiment was built using Experiment Centre (Version 3.6, SensoMotoric Instruments).Eye-tracking device. Eye movements were recorded monocularly and at a frequency of 30Hz using the REDn Scientific eye-tracking device (SensoMotoric Instruments). Gaze was calibrated using a 5-point method and a calibration area of 1920 X 1080. We used a centered black cross for the fixation points during the initial calibration and throughout the experiment. These were Arial in font and 72 in size. The experiment was built to measure dwell time percentage during the IVT only. Diet. Diet was assessed using an adapted version of the 5 item dietary practice scale used by Piazza, Ruby, Loughnan et al.(2015).We expanded the original scale to include 8 dietary practices. These included “Meat lover,” “Omnivore,”“Semi-vegetarian,” “Pescatarian,” “Lacto-or Ovo-vegetarian,”“Strict vegetarian,”“Dietary vegan,” and“Lifestyle vegan”. Definitions for each category are provided in Appendix C. Procedure Preliminary procedures. Participants were tested individually. Having been welcomed into the lab each participant received an information sheet and consent form. All participants who arrived at the lab gave their consent. Each participant was seated on a stationary chair at a desk where the equipment stood. The experimenter explained that they VISUAL ENGAGMENT WITH ANIMALS.7would load up the experiment and leave them to complete it in privacy. The experiment ran an initial calibration of the eye before moving through into the task information. Task information was presented across three separate screens which outlined for the participant what would be required of them (See Appendix D). Warm-up. Participants took part in two identical IVT. The first was framed as a warm-up. These warm-up trials ran automatically and did not require any participant action. Following task information, participants saw a screen which read “Warm-up” for 4000ms. The animal category was then announced (e.g. “Farmed Animals” “Companion Animals” or Endangered Animals”) and remained on screen for 4000ms. A centered fixation point appeared for 500ms before the first category animal image appeared for 10,000ms. It was during each 10,000ms image presentation that eye-movements were recorded. This same fixation point/image presentation routine was repeated three times over to cover all three images in each category. The order in which each animal category was presented was randomized across participants. Having completed the IVT for each animal category, participants were presented with a screen instructing them that the warm-up was now complete. This instruction screen was advanced manually by the participant. Video watching task. Following the first IVT, participants took part in the video watching task. The animal category was first announced and remained on screen for 4000ms. The appropriate video then played and was concluded with a blank screen lasting 3000ms. Participants were then made aware that the video had finished. Having manually moved the experiment along, the participant was next asked to indicate their current emotional state. They read: “Howpositive or negative do you feel right now?” and should select their response via mouse-click on a 7-point scale with the following range: “Really negative,” “Fairly negative,” “Slightly negative,” “Neutral,” “Slightly positive,” “Fairly positive” and “Really positive”. Again, this screen was manually advanced. The participant was next VISUAL ENGAGMENT WITH ANIMALS.8presented with the statement “I contribute to the suffering of Farmed/ Companion/ Endangered animals” and was asked to indicate their response using the “Y” (Yes) and “N” (No) keys on the keyboard before pressing space bar to advance. “I contribute to the well-being of Farmed/Companion/Endangered animals” was presented on the next screen and participants indicated their response as previous. Responses to these Y/N questions failed to record due to a programming error, and therefore will not be discussed further.The second IVT. As in the first IVT, participants saw a centered fixation point (500ms) followed by the first category animal image (10,000ms). Again, the REDn was programmed to record eye-movement during each of the 10,000ms image presentation. After each animal image the participant was then presented with the statement: “Thinking about how ___ (e.g. Cows) are slaughtered for their meat makes me feel outraged” and are again asked to indicate their response using the “Y” (Yes) and “N” (No) keys on the keyboard. This question was tailored to each animal category and target animal (see Appendix E for a list of each statements used). Next the participant read: “___ (e.g.,Cows) possess a capacity to suffer that is meaningfully similar to humans” and are asked to indicate their response Y/N as previous. This procedure was repeated three times over, once for each animal target. Due to a programming error, responses to these Y/N question were not recorded, and therefore they will not be discussed further. The entire procedure from the beginning of the video watching task to the end of the second IVT was repeated for each animal category, the order of which was randomized for each participant. See Appendix F for a visual representation of the experiment flow.
Contrast polarity of a stimulus does not affect the cueing effect
Gaze cueing Contrast polarity Gaze perception
According to the contrast polarity effect, people’s attention is sensitive to dark objects within light backgrounds. According to the gaze-cueing effect, a human gaze shift attracts people’s attention towards the direction of the darker region of the observed eyes, thus the gaze-cueing effect depends on the contrast polarity of the observed eyes. Therefore, a human gaze is perceived as a darker spot within a lighter background. In the present study, combining the contrast polarity effect and the gaze-cueing effect we examined whether the colour contrast between a black and a white square that suddenly flip on a computer screen can have a similar effect to that of gaze-cueing. The prediction was that participants would perceive the side where the black square moved after the flipping as attentional cue, therefore when an object appeared on the side that the black square moved, reaction times would be shorter compared to when the object appeared on the opposite side. The results showed that reaction times in the two conditions did not differ significantly. Thus, the contrast polarity of a stimulus does not affect the cueing effect.
The experiment was conducted using a single within-subject design. The independent variable was the cue congruency, which consisted of two conditions: the object appeared either congruently or incongruently with the attentional cue. The dependent variable was the reaction times of the participants which were measured in millisecond (ms). Procedure. Each participant was tested individually in a quiet room at the library of Lancaster University. Participants were tested at different days and times, including morning and evening hours. The only people present in the room during the conduct of the experiment were the participant and the experimenter. In the beginning, participants were asked to read the experiment instructions from the computer screen and they were also given clarifications, if needed, by the researcher. Afterwards, the experiment started and two squares, one black and one white, sharing one side were presented on the screen for half a second. The side that the squares shared was located at the centre of the screen, therefore one square appeared on the left side of the screen and the other one on the right side of the screen. Then the squares flipped and changed position and the apparent motion of the two squares was the cue. One second after flipping, the squares disappeared and a picture of an object randomly appeared either on the left or on the right side of the screen for one more second. Afterwards, the object disappeared and the screen remained blank. The task of the participants was to press the appropriate keyboard button as fast and as accurately as possible, depending on the side of the screen where the object appeared. So, they had to press the «Q» button on the keyboard when the object appeared on the left side of the screen or the «P» button when the object appeared on the right side of the screen. They were given one second to respond to the object appearance. The sequence of the trials was the same for every participant. Each one of the 6 objects appeared on total 30 times congruently with the cue and 30 times incongruently with it. Thus, the total number of trials for every participant was 360, 180 trials that the objects appeared congruently with the cue and 180 that they appeared incongruently with it. The experiment lasted for 20 minutes for each participant and at the end of every session, a message appeared on the screen which informed the participants that the experiment was over. The prediction was that the side where the black square would move after the flipping would be perceived as an attentional cue by the participants. Their gaze would be attracted to the cue and an effect similar to the gaze-cueing effect would appear. So, their reaction times would be shorter for the trials where the objects would appear on the same side with the attentional cue compared to the trials where the objects would appear on the opposite side of the cue. The independent variable was the cue congruency which included two conditions, the congruent trials (when the object appeared on the same side with the cue) and the incongruent trials (when the object appeared on the opposite side of the cue).
The effects of ambient temperature on aggressive cognitions
Ambient, temperature, aggression Linear mixed effects modelling, regression, correlation
The world is getting warmer and it is of interest to researchers to explore how changes in temperature experience affect human behaviour. The heat hypothesis suggests that an increase in heat is associated with an increase in antisocial behaviour (e.g. violence, aggression). However social embodiment studies have also demonstrated hotter temperatures to be associated with less antisocial behaviour (e.g. greater gift giving). This study investigated whether higher ambient temperatures are associated with more or less antisocial responding using a controlled laboratory approach. Participants were placed into either a cold room or a hot room whilst they completed two tasks that implicitly measured the accessibility of aggressive cognitions. Using a combination of linear mixed effects analyses and regression analyses, the results demonstrated that there was no significant difference between the two temperature conditions concerning the accessibility of aggressive cognitions in a lexical decision go/no-go task and a word fragment completion task. Consequently the heat hypothesis and theories based upon a social embodiment framework were not supported in this case. Possible alternative explanations and limitations of the study are discussed regarding the inconsistent results to that proposed by particular theoretical frameworks and illustrated in previous research. Directions for future research are suggested in light of the present findings.
Participants In total, 65 participants took part in this study. Unfortunately the preregistered sample size figure of 120 participants was unable to be reached due to recruitment limitations. Participants were recruited via Lancaster University’s SONA system, via adverts, were friends of the researcher or were recruited on an opportunistic basis around the Lancaster University campus. As a reward for participating, participants were entered into a prize draw to win one of 12 £10 Amazon vouchers. Participants were excluded if they met any of several a priori agreed upon rules for exclusion: (a) non-native English speaker, or (b) made a connection in the debrief section between the room temperature and aggression measurements. Three participants were excluded from the analyses on this basis. Therefore 62 participants data remained in the analyses. Demographic information was obtained using questions on the Qualtrics survey (Qualtrics, Provo, UT). The mean age of participants was 25.29 years (SD = 8.83; 43 female, 19 male). It was preregistered that participants must be between 18 and 55 years of age however due to the prospect of increasing the sample size, the age range was increased to 18 to 60 years of age. Participants were randomly assigned to the cold condition (n = 31) or the hot condition (n = 31). Materials Lexical decision go/no-go task. A lexical decision go/no-go task was used to gauge the accessibility of aggressive cognitions. The standard lexical decision task (LDT) is an indirect measure of semantic activation of specific constructs (e.g. aggression) and is an excellent method to assess the activation of such semantic networks (Marsh & Landau, 1995; see Parrott, Zeichner & Evces, 2005). Advantageously, as the task does not require conscious expression, it is not easily affected by demand characteristics (see Greitemeyer & Osswald, 2011). The LDT task was used in conjunction with a go/no-go response whereby participants are instructed to respond as quickly as possible to a word (alike to the LDT) but to withhold any response if the presented stimulus is a nonword. The lexical decision go/no-go task has been demonstrated to be an excellent alternative to the standard LDT but also measures performance in a similar manner (Perea, Rosa & Gomez, 2002). Essentially, network activation is measured by the response latency with which participants respond to particular stimulus words, with faster reaction times (RTs) demonstrating more accessibility of the target construct (i.e. aggression) (Forster & Davis, 1984; Johnson & Hasher, 1987; Schacter, 1987; Morton, 1970). Specifically, faster RTs to aggressive words by participants in the hot condition, compared to the cold condition, would suggest that the construct of aggression is more accessible in hotter conditions. The lexical decision go/no-go task included the presentation of one hundred letter strings; 25 of which were aggressive-related words (e.g., gun), 25 of which were nonaggressive words (e.g., leaf) and 50 of which were nonword letter strings (e.g., breaff). The aggressive-related words were taken from Anderson, Carnagey & Eubanks (2003) and Johnson (2012). The non-aggressive items were extracted from Anderson et al. (2003) or chosen by the experimenter. Three independent raters who were blind to the study aims assessed the nonaggressive and aggressive words to determine if they were appropriately determined as nonaggressive or aggressive respectively. Fleiss Kappa demonstrated perfect agreement between the three individuals judgments, κ = 1, p < .0001, indicating that the raters agreed that all items coded as aggressive or nonaggressive were appropriately coded as such. Nonword letter strings took the form of pseudowords to prevent the possibility of participants classifying the words by a simple surface analysis of substrings. To illustrate this, a letter string consisting of “xx” can be quickly and easily recognised as a nonword without in-depth processing because no valid English words contain “xx” (see Bösche, 2010). Furthermore, research has demonstrated that more frequent words (e.g. Perea et al., 2002) and shorter words are responded to quicker (e.g. Spieler & Balota, 2000). Given this, the word frequency of each real word (i.e., aggressive-related words and nonaggressive words) was obtained using the SUBLECT database (Van Heuven, Mandera, Keuleers, & Brysbaert, 2014) and the word type categories were matched on word length. According to Welch's t-test, there was no significant difference between the aggressive related words and nonaggressive words in terms of word frequency, (t (40) = 1.64, p = .12), and word length, (t (48) = 0, p = 1). Together this reduces the effect that word length and frequency might have on response latencies. In the lexical decision go/no-go task, participants were instructed to respond by pressing the ‘spacebar’ key on the keyboard when presented with a valid English word (i.e. go response) however to withhold any response if presented with a nonword (i.e. no-go response). The experimental trials consisted of 50 real word letter strings and 50 nonword letter string trials. The onset of each trial was marked by a plus sign (+), which acted as a fixation point for the participant. After a 1000ms latency, the fixation point was replaced by a letter string. This stimulus item disappeared after a latency of 3000ms and was followed by the next fixation point and then the next letter string was presented automatically in the same aforementioned fashion. The presentation and randomization of letter strings, and the recording of response latencies were controlled by JavaScript code running on Qualtrics. Word Fragment Completion (WFC) Task. To measure the activation of aggressive thoughts participants also completed a WFC task consisting of 50 word fragments (adapted from Anderson et al., 2003). Using Qualtrics, participants filled the blanks with letters to form a valid English word within a five-minute timeframe. Of the 50 word fragments, 25 could be completed to form either a nonaggressive word or aggressive word (e.g., “ki__” could be completed with “kill” or “kite”). The other 25 word fragments could be completed with only nonaggressive words. Only the word fragments with possible aggressive-completions were used in the analyses. The remaining 25 fragments were used as a decoy to ensure that participants would not guess that aggression was being measured. If a word could not be completed, participants were required to leave the answer box blank. This task is a valid measure of aggressive cognitions (Anderson et al., 2003). The outcome variable of aggressive cognitions was calculated by dividing the number of word fragments that were completed as aggressive words by the total number of word-fragment completions that could be completed as aggressive. Fragments were presented in a randomized fashion for each participant controlled by Qualtrics. Baseline Temperature Comfort. A measure of baseline temperature comfort level was also included in the Qualtrics survey, which measured how cold or hot the participant generally feels. A rating scale of -50 to +50 measured this, where a higher score indicates a feeling of generally hotter. Many aspects can affect an individual’s thermal perception and comfort ranging from physical to cultural aspects (Laskari, et al., 2017; see for e.g. Djamila, 2017). For example, body temperature deviations can have their roots in physiology such as age (Castle, Norman, Yeh, Miller & Yoshikawa, 1991). These factors vary across individuals, raising the possibility that individuals have baseline temperatures or comfort levels that differ systematically from the average population (Obermeyer, Samra, & Mullainathan, 2017). In other words, the same temperature that is normal for one person might be cold for another. Given this, variations in an individuals subjective measure of baseline temperature comfort will be explored to see whether this moderates temperature effects on aggressive cognitions. Outside Temperature. A measure of outside temperature was not originally planned and its inclusion was not preregistered. However data from the local weather station was used to calculate outside temperature during each testing session. Overall, the mean outside temperature was 18.6°C (SD = 2.91) and ranged from 12.6 to 22.9°. Procedure and Design Participants were welcomed into either the cold or hot room depending on their random allocation. The room temperature reading before each testing session began was recorded, which demonstrated that the range of temperatures for all sessions was at 15.5-16.9°C (M = 16.14, SD = 0.39) and 27.8–29.8°C (M = 28.56, SD = 0.60) for the cold and hot condition respectively. The heat-controlled room consisted of five workplaces equipped with conventional PCs allowing for simultaneous data collection from five participants at one time. Participants were separated from each other by partitions between the workstations. Whilst at a workstation, participants received the study information and gave their consent to participate. They then completed four decision making tasks using the Qualtrics survey software, two of which measured the accessibility of aggressive thoughts (i.e. lexical decision go/no-go task and WFC task) and two of which measured cognitive ability (as part of another students MSc project). All instructions concerning the tasks were given via the computer. The four tasks were presented in a randomised order between participants by Qualtrics to reduce order effects (e.g. participants may be tired for tasks at the end) and carryover effects (e.g. earlier tasks may influence behaviour on subsequent tasks) (see Shaughnessy, Zechmeister & Zechmeister, 2006).
The Effect of Systematic Variance in Action Capabilities on Grasp Ability Perception.
Embodied perception Grasp ability Affordance perception Virtual Reality
The ecological approach to visual perception asserts that individuals perceive environments relative to the possibility of action within their environment. Hence, to successfully interact with one’s environment, individuals must be able to accurately perceive the extent over which actions can be performed, widely referred to as action boundaries. Furthermore, as the world in which we inhabit is continually changing and subsequently placing various constraints upon ones action boundaries, it is necessary for individuals to be able to update their perceived action boundaries to accommodate for such variance. While research has displayed that individuals can update their perceptions to accommodate for variance, what is unclear in these circumstances is which action boundary does the perceptual system calibrate to. This study investigated this by analysing the effect of systematic variance on perceived grasp ability in virtual reality. Participants provided estimates of grasp ability following motor experience grasping with either a small, normal, large or a varied size hand. In the variance condition, participants experienced the small hand 25% of the time, the normal hand 25% of the time, and the large hand 50% of the time. The results indicated that participants’ perception of grasp ability reflected the artificial manipulation such that grasp ability was largest in the large hand condition. In addition, regarding the variable condition participants took all visual information into consideration however erred on the side of caution. However, it may be that factors such as age and personality influenced the results.
Open Science Framework (OSF) This study has been pre-registered with the OSF; See https://osf.io/zkjdt/ for the main OSF project page. The following study deviated from the pre-registration in that data collection occurred for 12 days longer than initially intended as participant uptake was not as high as initially assumed it would be. Participants 30 Lancaster University Students (5 males and 25 females) aged between 18-26 (Mage = 21.07, SDage = 1.17), naïve to the purpose of this study, participated. All participants were recruited via opportunity sampling, utilising the Lancaster University Sona research participation system, advertisements and the researcher’s social network, and were paid £5 for their participation. Of these participants 29 were right-handed, and one was mixed-handed. The one mixed-handed participant elected to complete the study with their right hand, therefore, the following conclusions and data should be treated as all right-handed participants. In addition, all participants had normal or corrected-to-normal vision and had no known medical history of visual atypicalties, beyond being long or short-sighted, motoric or rheumatologic difficulties. All participants provided informed consent. Lancaster University Research Ethics Committee granted ethical approval for this study. Stimuli and apparatus A virtual environment was developed in Unity 3D© Gaming Engine with the Leap Motion plugin. The 3D VR colour display comprised a 3D model of a room in which a table was located in the centre. Upon this table were either two grey dots (in the calibration trials; See Panel A of Figure 2) or a grey block (block size manipulation trials; See Panel B Figure 2). The participant’s viewed the VR from a first-person perspective reflecting their natural eye-height. The environment was presented to participants through an Oculus Rift CV1 HMD, which displayed the stereoscopic reality at 2160×1200 at 90Hz split over both displays (Binstock, 2015). The movement of the head was tracked by the head mounted display (HMD) and updated in real-time as the participant looked around the environment. Furthermore, the location of the hand was tracked in real-time, using the Leap Motion hand-tracking sensor mounted on to the Oculus Rift CV1 HMD, and was mapped onto the virtual hand thereby causing the virtual hand to move in correspondence with the natural hand. Procedure Each participant was required to attend one testing session, which lasted approximately 30 minutes in duration. Prior to the commencement of the study, full information regarding the requirements of the study was provided by means of a written information sheet. This information sheet was supplemented with a verbal explanation and an opportunity to ask questions. Once full understanding of the study requirements was established, participants provided informed consent and were reminded of their right to withdraw. Following the attainment of consent, participants were required to complete a simple demographic questionnaire notably detailing the participant’s age, sex, hand dominance, and the presence of ocular atypicalities and motoric or rheumatologic difficulties. Critically, at this time the grasp that the participants are required to visualise employing during the perceptual task was defined and demonstrated. This grasp was defined as the ability to place their thumb on one edge of the block and extend their hand over the surface of the block and place one of their fingers on the parallel edge of the block. Following this participants were required to don the oculus rift HMD with attached Leap Motion Sensor and complete four experimental conditions, the order of completion was randomly counterbalanced across participants. The four experimental conditions were the constricted grasp condition, the normal grasp condition, the extended grasp condition and the systematically varied grasp condition. In the constricted grasp condition participants gained motor experience with a virtual hand that was 50% of the size of their actual hand, therefore constricting the grasp to 50% of the normal grasp ability. In the normal grasp condition participants gained motor experience with a virtual hand reflecting the true size of their actual hand, therefore grasp ability was 100% of their normal grasp ability. In the extended grasp condition participants gained motor experience with a hand that was 150 % of the size of their actual hand thereby extending their grasp ability 50% beyond normal grasp ability. Whilst in the systematically varied grasp ability condition the participants experienced the constricted hand size 25% of the time, the normal hand size 25% of the time and the extended hand size 50% of the time. Each experiential condition consisted of two phases: the calibration phase and the block size manipulation phase. The calibration phase consisted of 30 trials in which participants viewed the virtual display comprising of a table upon which two grey dots, one to the left and one to the right, were located (See Panel A Figure 2). The inclusion of a calibration phase occurred to provide the participants with the necessary amount of synchronous visual motor information to subsequently induce the illusion that the virtual hand is the participant’s hand (Kilteni et al., 2012). The engagement of this illusion is critical because if the participants do not employ this illusion, the subsequent results will not accurately reflect the study manipulations. In addition, the calibration phase provided participants with visual and motor experience regarding the action boundary associated with the virtual hand. Completion of the calibration phase required participants to touch the leftmost dot with the leftmost digit of their dominant hand and the rightmost dot with the rightmost digit again of their dominant hand. Participants were informed that it was ok if they could not reach the dot so long as they performed the action. After the participants had performed the action touching both dots, the two dots disappeared and reappeared in a different location on the table. The location of the dots and the distance between the dots was randomly varied across all 30 trials. However, the distance away from the participants that the dots appeared was maintained throughout as dictated by the Z coordinate in the study script. On completion of the calibration phase participants were instructed to place both their hands on their lap, this occurred so that the hand was out of range of the Leap Motion Sensor and hence the virtual hand was not visible in the virtual reality. At this time the virtual reality display was altered so that that the participant viewed the display of the table upon which there was a white block located (See Panel B Figure 2). Once the new display was presented the researcher placed the participant’s hand, they had just completed the calibration phase with on the right and left arrow keys of a standardised QWERTY keyboard. Participants were then instructed to imagine that they were going to grasp the block, employing the previously demonstrated grasp, and manipulate the size of the block to reflect the maximum size they believe they would be able to grasp with their dominant hand using the right and left keys. Each button press altered the size of the block by 1cm. Once the participant was happy that the block reflected the maximum size they could grasp with their dominant hand the researcher saved the final size and presented another block. This phase consisted of eight trials, in four of which the block started small at 3cm and the remaining four the block started large at 20cm. This occurred in order to control for the potential influence previous perception has on later judgements, a phenomenon commonly known as hysteresis (Poltoratski & Tong, 2014) On completion of both the calibration and block size manipulation phases for each four conditions participants were given a short verbal debrief regarding the true aims and theoretical underpinning of the study and an opportunity to ask any questions. To supplement this verbal debrief participants were also provided with a written debrief again documenting the aims and theory of the study and contact details for the lead researcher. The subsequent raw data obtained included eight maximum grasp block size estimates, four relating to the block that started at 3cm and four relating to the block that started at 20cm, for each experimental condition; small hand size, normal hand size, large hand size and variable hand size. Therefore 32 estimates were obtained from each participant.