Facts May Care About Your Feelings: The Effects of Empirical and Anecdotal Evidence in the Perception of Climate Change
Climate change, communication, perception, emotion, evidence
Although the effects of humanmade climate change become ever more potent, the consensus gap between climate scientists and the public is as wide as ever. It is critical that climate change communication is improved to try and close this gap. There are several strategies that can be implemented, including using anecdotes alongside or instead of empirical evidence to elicit emotions. In this study, 74 members of the public completed a survey. Participants were randomly assigned to one of four conditions which dictated the type of evidence they received: no evidence, empirical evidence, anecdotal evidence, or both empirical and anecdotal evidence. Results suggest that, in general, there was no effect of evidence on participants’ perceptions of climate change. This result held even after controlling for worldview and ideology. These findings have implications for the theory of inserting emotion into climate change communication.
This study gained ethical approval from the Faculty of Science and Technology Research Ethics Committee. Participants and design There were 74 participants (26 male; 46 female; one non-binary; one preferred not to say). The mean age of the participants was 37.99 (SD = 16.93). Participants were recruited via advertising the study on the researcher’s social media accounts (Facebook and Instagram) using a standardised advertisement (see Appendix A) and through word of mouth. Participants were all members of the general public. The study manipulated two independent variables in a between-participants design: anecdotal evidence (without-anecdotal vs. with-anecdotal) and empirical evidence (without-empirical vs. with empirical), resulting in four conditions. Participants were randomly allocated to one of the four conditions, subject to the constraint of equal cell numbers. Evidence Passages Empirical Evidence The empirical evidence vignette included a statement explaining that human-induced carbon dioxide emissions and global average temperature have synchronously increased since pre-industrial times, accompanied with graphs demonstrating these upward trends. The vignette also highlighted the scientific consensus that humanmade climate change is occurring and will have adverse consequences. Finally, the vignette explained that these adverse consequences had already begun to materialise. The increase of extreme weather events was highlighted in a graph that showed the tripling of weather-related disasters between 1980 and 2010. Finally, the vignette finished with references for the information it contained (see Appendix B). Anecdotal Evidence The anecdotal evidence vignette contained information about Storms Dudley, Eunice and Franklin which all made landfall in Britain in quick succession in 2022. The storms were a weather-related event that some scientists have linked to climate change (Barrett, 2022); Specifically, the vignette included information about the storms’ destructiveness, such as the cost of the damage they caused, and the number of people killed. The destructiveness of the storms was highlighted with images of damage and flooding in Wells, Otley, and Brentwood, as well as an image from Blackpool demonstrating the height and power of the waves caused by the storms. The vignette included a stock image of a man standing in a flooded living room and a short passage outlining the experience of a fictitious character named Matt Johnson whose family home had been severely flooded as a result of the storms. The vignette concluded with a statement from climate scientist Robert Klein who argued that the impact of the storm was exacerbated by climate change, which generated “super storm” conditions. Finally, there was a reference to an article about the storms and their link to climate change (see Appendix C). Measures Table 1 contains an overview of the measures embedded in the questionnaire. For the full questionnaire, please refer to Appendix D. Disaster Belief The disaster belief measure measured predicted estimates of the frequency of weather-related disasters that will occur in the listed years. Participants were given an approximate frequency for 2019 from the International Disaster Database. The measure consisted of six items: 2030, 2040, 2050, 2060, 2070 and 2080. Participants responded by typing in their estimated number next to the relevant year. Harm Extent The harm extent measure consisted of questions concerning how much harm that participants think climate change will cause themselves, their family, their community, Britain, other countries, and future generations. There were six items, such as ‘How much do you think climate change will harm you?’, and ‘How much do you think climate change will harm people in Britain?’ Responses were rated from (1) ‘not at all’ to (4) ‘a great deal’. Harm Timing The harm timing measure consisted of questions concerning when participants thought climate change will cause harm to themselves, their family, their community, Britain, other countries, and future generations. There were only two items, ‘When do you think climate change will begin to harm Britain?’ and ‘When do you think climate change will begin to harm other countries?’. Responses were rated as (1) ‘Never’, (2) ‘100 years’; (3) ‘50 years’; (4) ‘25 years’; (5) ‘10 years’ and (6) ‘Right now’. CO2 Attributions The CO2 attributions measure measured how much participants think human carbon dioxide emissions contribute to events such as heatwaves, rising sea levels, flooding, and Storms Dudley, Eunice, and Franklin. There were six items, such as ‘CO2 contribution to the observed increase in atmospheric temperature during the last 130 years’, ‘CO2 contribution to the European heat wave in 2022 that killed over 5,000 people’, and ‘CO2 contribution to storms Dudley, Eunice, and Franklin in the UK (2022)’. These responses were gathered using a sliding scale from 0 to 100%. Intention The intention measure consisted of questions asking about participants’ pro-environmental intentions. There were seven items. Examples of items include ‘I will take part in an environmental event (e.g., Earth hour)’, ‘I will give money to a group that aims to protect the environment’, and ‘I will switch to products that are more environmentally friendly’. The response options were simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’. Mitigation The mitigation measure consisted of questions asking about participants’ support for mitigating policies. There were five items. Example items include, ‘Signing an international treaty that requires Britain to cut its carbon dioxide emissions by 90% by 2050’, ‘Adding a surcharge to electrical bills to establish a fund to help make buildings more energy efficient and to teach British citizens how to reduce energy use’, and ‘Providing tax rebates for people who purchase energy-efficient vehicles or solar panels’. Responses were rated from (1) ‘Strongly Oppose’ to (4) ‘Strongly Support’. CO2 Adjustment The CO2 adjustment measure measures how much participants think Britain should adjust its CO2 emissions over the next 10 years. There was only one item: ‘How much should Britain adjust CO2 emissions during the next 10 years?’. Responses were rated from (1) ‘Not at all’ to (6) ‘Reduce by 50%’. Free-Market Support The free-market support measure consisted of questions asking about participants’ support for the free market. There were five items. Examples items include, ‘An economic system based on free-markets, unrestrained by government interference, automatically works best to meet human needs’ and ‘The preservation of the free-market system is more important than localized environmental concerns’. Two items, ‘Free and unregulated markets pose important threats to sustainable development’ and ‘The free-market system is likely to promote unsustainable consumption’, required reverse coding upon analysis. Table 1 Measures embedded within the questionnaire. The first column contains the name of the measures; the second column contains the instructions on how to respond to items in that measure; and the third column describes how answers to the items were coded. Measure Name Questions Coded Response Disaster belief Please provide an estimate of the frequency of weather-related disasters that will occur in each year (6 items). Participants used the keyboard to type in a number for each year. Harm extent The following items examine your thoughts about the extent of harm that will be caused by climate change (6 items). 4-point scale: (1) ‘Not at all’; (2) ‘A little’; (3) ‘A moderate amount’; (4) ‘A great deal’. Harm timing The following items examine your thoughts about when climate change will begin to cause harm (2 items). 6-point scale: (1) ‘Never’; (2) ‘100 years’; (3) ‘50 years’; (4) ‘25 years’; (5) ‘10 years’; (6) ‘Right now’. CO2 attribution For each of the following questions, please estimate the contribution from human CO2 emissions to cause each event. For example, 0% would mean humans are not at all responsible, whereas 100% would mean that human CO2 emissions are fully responsible Participants used the mouse to place their response on a sliding scale. The sliding scale contained the numbers, ‘0’, ‘10’, ‘20’, ‘30’, ‘40’, ‘50’, ‘60’, ‘70’, ‘80’, ‘90’, and ‘100’. Pro-environmental intentions Please indicate whether or not you will engage in the following actions (7 items). 0 = No 1 = Yes Mitigation How much do you support or oppose the following policies (five items). 4-point scale; (1) ‘Strongly Oppose’; (2) ‘Oppose’; (3) ‘Support’; (4) ‘Strongly Support’. CO2 adjustment How much should Britain adjust CO2 emissions during the next 10 years? 6-point scale; (1) ‘Not at all’; (2) ‘Reduce by 10%’; (3) ‘Reduce by 20%’; (4) ‘Reduce by 30%’; (5) ‘Reduce by 40%’; (6) ‘Reduce by 50%’. Free-market belief Please indicate how much you agree with each statement (5 items). 5-point scale: (1) ‘Strongly Disagree’; (2) ‘Disagree’; (3) ‘Neutral’; (4) ‘Agree’; (5) ‘Strongly Agree’. Demographic questions What is your age? Participants used the keyboard to type in a number. What is your gender? 1 = Male; 2 = Female; 3 = Non-binary; 4 = Other; 5 = Prefer Not to Say Procedure All participants completed a questionnaire assessing their belief in and concern about humanmade climate change and their mitigation beliefs. The questionnaire was administered online using Qualtrics survey software. Participants responded to the questionnaire by using either the mouse to select answers or the keyboard to type in numbers. At the beginning of the questionnaire, all participants received an information sheet about the aim of the study, the lack of risks associated with participating, and how participant information is stored. Participants were asked to indicate their informed consent. For the full participant information sheet and consent form, please refer to Appendix E. After participants gave their consent and continued onto the survey, they were asked their age and gender. They were then presented with evidence according to the condition they were assigned to. There were four conditions: no evidence, empirical evidence, anecdotal evidence, and both empirical and anecdotal evidence. After they had read one or both evidence passages, participants answered the disaster belief measure. Next, they answered the CO2 attribution measure. Then they answered the harm extent measure and the harm timing measure. After that was the intention measure, and then they answered the mitigation measure. In the final part of the questionnaire, they were asked how much Britain should cut its CO2 emissions over ten years, and then questions on their support for the free market. Participants were then asked demographic questions about their age and gender. Finally, the participants were given a debrief sheet (Appendix F).
The effects of code switching in the level of persuasiveness of advertising and marketing messages on bilingual consumers.
Bilingualism Code-switching Language Manipulation Advertising Communication Language Comprehension/Cognition
Bilingualism and advertising are two concepts which are not commonly related, but based on recent statistics they definitely should be. Recent numbers show that more than 50% of the world’s population is bilingual (Grosjean, 2010). However, there has been minimal research concerning bilingual consumers and how bilinguals may differently encounter advertising messages, based on their ability to speak two languages. The research that has been done, is primarily based on code switching; the practice of switching between languages during speech. It is a very common practice between bilinguals, which they use to better communicate and better express themselves during a conversation in a specific social context. This study will attempt to analyse the effects of language manipulation upon bilingual individuals, by implementing the concept of advertising and more specifically bilingual advertising. participants will firstly encounter a manipulation of attitude towards language, before encountering a set of advertising slogans of certain products, in a code-switched format. They will then have to rate the products, based on the persuasiveness of the advertising slogans.
Firstly, a manipulation of attitude towards the language took place. Participants were presented with a random mock article, either in Greek or English. Participants were then presented with four audio recordings of advertising messages/slogans of four different products. Slogans were either all in Greek or English and they were presented in the same code-switching direction; from primary to Secondary or from Secondary to primary. A single word was chosen from each slogan and was code-switched to the opposite language appropriately. Participants were then asked to evaluate the featured products based on the advertising message they heard. Evaluations were obtained through a series of six questions, asking the participant to rate the featured product on a Likert type scale, varying from one to six. These included: “poor/high quality”, “level of appeal”, “odds of recommending the product to others”, “odds of buying the product”, “mediocre/exceptional” and “bad/good”.
Can better linguistic fluency improve the memorability and credibility of a sentence?
Linguistic Fluency, Alliteration, Advertising,Memory,Credibility
Processing fluency is often defined as how easy information is to comprehend based on a range of characteristics. One form of processing fluency is linguistic fluency, which refers to how easy a sentence is to interpret, regardless of the information within it. Some research suggests that disfluency can increase the recall of material, but this is contested. Previous studies have also shown that the linguistic fluency of a sentence can be improved with literary devices, such as rhyme, and that this can result in better perceptions of credibility. Research has yet to investigate how alliteration, as an example of linguistic fluency, could improve perceptions of credibility and the memorability of a sentence. This research investigated this by operationalising lists of alliterating and non-alliterating aphorisms, alongside measures of self-reported credibility and memorability, in a between-subjects study. Results of two independent t-tests provided two significant results, suggesting that better linguistic fluency improves the credibility and memorability of a sentence. Implications for researchers, the legal system and advertising are discussed.
Materials The preliminary five aphorisms were provided by Astroten with five further aphorisms being added to increase the power of the study. Aphorisms that were selected came from various literary examples, such as quotes from English Literature (Williams, 2011). Alternatively, some aphorisms were created using the definition “a short clever saying that is intended to express a general truth” (Cambridge Dictionary, 2022). The most common alliterating aphorisms, such as “All roads lead to Rome”, were purposefully avoided so that the effect of familiarity had a reduced effect on the memorability self-report. When creating the non-alliterating aphorisms, alliterating words were exchanged for non-alliterating words using a thesaurus so that the change in alliterative properties did not affect the overall meaning. The alliterating and non-alliterating aphorisms were kept divided into two different lists and were counterbalanced in a random order for each participant (Appendix C). Participants were asked to rate the credibility of the aphorisms based on a Likert scale of 1-9, in parallel with the scale used by McGlone and Tofighbakhsh (1999). Participants were asked to complete two games of Sudoku as a filler task (Appendix D). The grids were designed so that participants would begin with the easier version and move on to a more challenging version to ensure that the task occupied the full amount of time. Instructions were provided so that those who were unfamiliar with the game were still able to attempt the task. 18 Additionally, participants were given a piece of paper with 10 individual sections to write down as many of the aphorisms as they could remember at the end of the study. They were also provided with a pen, and time was kept using a watch. Design This study used a between-subjects design. This was chosen because there was a strong chance that order effects would impact the results of the memory test in a repeated measures design, due to the similarity between the alliterating and non-alliterating aphorisms. Choosing to mix the aphorisms could have resulted in demand characteristics affecting the results as the disparity between them would have been obvious to the participant. This is something that Oppenheimer and Frank (2008) were also keen to avoid. A quantitative data collection approach was taken because it was judged as the most appropriate way to measure memory, as well as facilitating comparison with other studies that have employed similar methods (McGlone & Tofighbakhsh, 1999; Kara-Yakoubian et al 2022). Participants were either part of the alliterating or non-alliterating aphorisms condition. Procedure Ethical approval for this study was given by the supervisor of this research, in line with Lancaster University Psychology Department protocols (Appendix E). When participants were approached to take part in the study they were first asked to read an information sheet (Appendix F) followed by a consent form, completion of which evidenced their informed consent to take part. Participation began in a quiet room within the university library. It was ensured that they could spare 20 minutes to take part and that they had turned off their phones before the study began. They began the study by rating each aphorism in 19 their list on a scale of 1-9 based on how credible they thought the aphorism was. The instructions were read to them, but they also had the opportunity to read them if they were unsure (Appendix G). They were then given three minutes to memorise as many of the aphorisms as possible. Following this, participants spent 10 minutes completing the Sudoku, with instructions again read to them and provided on the sheet. Once the 10 minutes were complete the participants were asked to spend five minutes trying to recall as many of the aphorisms from their list as possible by writing them down (Appendix H). They were given one point for every aphorism they could remember correctly. No points were given if the participants could only remember parts of the aphorism. As short-term memory is often described as being 7+/-2 (Miller 1956), memorisation of the entire list would likely have been impossible. Therefore, a prompt was added by reading the participant the first word from each of their aphorisms after three minutes. This aligns more closely with advertising research, which frequently measures prompted recall (Romaniuk, 2006; Charlesworth et al, 2022). On completion, participants were thanked for their participation in the research and given their £5 payment. They were also provided with a debrief sheet (Appendix I) that provided details of resources related to the study and the contact details of the researcher and supervisor.
The roles of reading motivation and reading strategies in secondary school students’ reading comprehension
reading comprehension; reading inference; reading motivation; expository and narrative texts; secondary school
The aim of the study was to investigate comprehension and inference ability in relation to text genre, reading strategies, intrinsic and extrinsic reading motivation, and gender in mainstream secondary school UK students. Data were collected from a sample of 27 participants; retained data of 9 secondary school students (5 males, 4 females) data were used for the study analysis. These responses were used to inform a simulated dataset for the analysis. The participants completed an online study, which measured their intrinsic and extrinsic reading motivation The Motivation for Reading Questionnaire (MRQ; Wang & Guthrie, 2004), comprehension and inference ability of narrative and expository texts (Currie et al., 2021), and reading strategies (Denton, Wolters, et al., 2015). Due to sample size limitations the decision was made to simulate individual datasets for reading strategies, intrinsic reading motivation, extrinsic reading motivation, narrative texts, and expository texts by gender, following the simulation methods proposed by Muldoon (2019). The results of the study revealed that female participants scored lower on reading strategies and demonstrated poorer performance for narrative and expository texts. There was no gender difference found for reading motivation. These findings will be discussed in relation to our understanding of gender differences in inferential reading comprehension, reading motivation and practical implications for the classroom.
Participants The intention was to collect original data from UK Year 7, 8, 9, and 10 mainstream secondary school students. This was through schools and word of mouth. Unfortunately, schools who were approached were not able distribute the study information in time for data collection before the summer break. In total 27 students started the study and completed data was collected from 9 (5 males, 4 females; M age = 13.83 years, SD = 2.45). These data were used to inform a simulated dataset to test the study predictions.
Materials Reading Motivation To assess students’ reading motivation 7 out of 8 domains from “The Motivation for Reading Questionnaire” (MRQ): A Revised Version (Wang & Guthrie, 2004) were used (grades domain from extrinsic scale was removed). The forty-one-question scale measured extrinsic and intrinsic motivation. Intrinsic motivation consisted of three domains: curiosity (7 items), involvement (7 items), and preference for challenge (5 items). Seven scales (curiosity, involvement, challenge, recognition, social and competition) reported good internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha ˃ .70; Wang and Guthrie, 2004). An example of intrinsic motivation item: “I enjoy a long, involved story or fiction book”. Extrinsic motivation measured the following four domains: recognition (5 items), social (7 items), competition (6 items), and compliance (4 items). An example of extrinsic motivation item: “I like having my friends sometimes tell me I am a good reader”. Each statement had four possible answers, which were assigned values from 0 to 3 (very different from me = 0, a little different from me = 1, a little like me = 2, a lot like me = 3), and participants were asked to select the most appropriate for them. Scoring for negative item 40 was reversed before assigning the values. Text Genre Participants were asked to read 12 narrative, and 12 expository texts. Narrative texts focussed on human characteristics and activities, based on interactions with different social groups, as families, friends, peers at schools and youth clubs. Expository texts, were science-based, underpinned by chemistry, physics, biology, and geology. Each text consisted of 7 sentences, with 2 critical sentences that required an inference in order to integrate their meanings. The distance between two critical sentences was varied – either adjacent or separated by up to 3 sentences of filler text to minimise the detection of any pattern by readers, which might result in a focus on just the critical sentences, rather than reading the text as a whole. Each text was followed by one question, requiring choosing one answer from yes/no options (correct answer was allocated a value = 1; incorrect answer = 0), which assessed participant’s inference ability and comprehension. Participants completed two practice items, one expository and one narrative text, before starting the test. Reading Strategies Reading strategy knowledge was assessed with items from the Contextualized Reading Strategy Survey (CReSS; Denton et al., 2015). In this, participants read situation-based reading scenarios and rate how frequently they use different reading strategies in those situations. The three selected scenarios assessed reader’s construction integration abilities (Kintsch, 1988). An example of a scenario used for the study “As a homework assignment for your English class, you have been asked to read a story from your textbook. Tomorrow your teacher will give you a quiz about the story. Which of these things do you do to help you understand a story while you are reading or after reading?”. The following strategies were displayed for students to choose from “I try to make mental pictures of the information in the story while I read. While I am reading, I think about how the parts of the story go together. I think about what the characters are doing in the story and why they are acting as they are. I predict what I think will happen next. I think about how this story is like other stories I have read”. Each strategy had four response options, with values assigned from 0 to 3 (I almost never do this = 0; I sometimes do this = 1; I usually do this = 2; I almost always do this = 3) for participants to choose the one, which they use the most.
Procedure The study was hosted on Qualtrics platform. First, the parents/ guardians accessed the study via a link, then they provided their consent. The child saw the next screen, where they read the information about the study and provided their assent. Participants were asked to complete the task at home in their own time, outside of their school commitment time. Participants were asked to provide information about their gender, age - month and year only. Task order was: (1) reading strategies, (2) narrative texts with yes/no questions about the texts, (3) expository texts with yes/no questions about the texts, and (4) intrinsic and extrinsic reading questionnaire. For the reading strategies questionnaire, participants were asked to read 3 scenarios, as described above. They read each scenario and then indicated on a 4-point Likert scale how frequently they used each strategy. To assess inference making, participants read 12 short narrative texts, and also 12 short expository texts. Each text was shown on 1 screen with the inference-tapping question on a separate screen. They pressed a button next to YES or NO to provide their answer. The final task required participants to complete a reading motivation questionnaire. They read 19 statements for intrinsic and 22 statements for extrinsic reading motivation, and then indicated on the 4-point Likert scale how likely of them it was, as described above. The whole procedure took approximately 30 minutes. Collected data was stored in password-protected file, on password-protected Master student’s Lancaster University’s Office 360, accessed through password-protected laptop.
Ethical Considerations The research was approved by the University Department Ethics Committee, and conducted in line with the Lancaster University ethics guidelines: https://www.lancaster.ac.uk/sci-tech/research/ethics/, and the BPS Code of Ethics and Conduct (2018). Measures were taken to maintain the participants’ anonymity: identifiable information as participant’s name, school name, participant’s full date of birth were not collected; with references to data collection in England. To investigate the study purposes of age and gender related differences, participant’s month and year of birth were obtained, and the student’s gender as reported by participant were collected.
An exploration of the psychological mechanism and effectiveness behind the co-creation process in advertising, based on the ‘Co-create by Sharp’ method.
Keywords: Co-creation, advertising, psychology, behaviour
Scholars have referred to co-creation as the interaction between firms and stakeholders to create value. Co-creation for product innovation and campaign delivery is a growing trend in today’s competitive market due to a demand for consumer-centric communication and product development strategies. Even when traditional research techniques are relevant for evaluating brand messaging, they are considered backwards looking. Traditional research techniques (e.g., interviews, questionnaires, focus groups) rely on companies’ terms rather than the customer’s domain, limiting stakeholders to only react to market offers instead of cooperating to build them. The application of co-creation techniques does not replace reactive research but is the new next step to building brand and campaign strategies. The Sharp Agency developed ‘Co-create by Sharp’, a co-creation methodology that aims to build campaign and brand strategies with a higher value of insight than other approaches. According to The Sharp Agency, their unique approach to co-creating ideas with stakeholders has demonstrated effectiveness in their clients’ performance (i.e., 400% of revenue increase, 33% growth speed, and 19% spending increase). However, the method lacks information that supports its efficacy, more specifically, an exploration of the perceptions of people involved in their co-creation methodology (i.e., co-creation participants, Sharp team members, and Sharp’s commissioning clients). This report aims to identify the presence of plausible psychological theories that could support the ‘Co-create by Sharp’ methodology. Accordingly, this study intends to explore the dynamics, perceived effectiveness, and limitations of the ‘Co-create by Sharp’ methodology through a series of individual interviews with the people involved in the process. The researcher worked as an intern in the Sharp Agency, and a qualitative experimental design was used to investigate the research objective. Three types of interviews were conducted to understand the ‘Co-create by Sharp’ process from its main perspectives: Co-creation participants, Sharp team members, and Sharp’s commissioning clients. Findings indicated that the ‘Co-create by Sharp’ method is supported by a specific psychological mechanism explained by Self-Determination and Implicit Self-esteem theories. Based on these theories, interviewees’ perceptions of co-creation suggest that the ‘Co-create by Sharp’ methodology generates participant engagement in brand co-creation. According to the literature reviewed, participant engagement increases the level of insight in co-creation outcomes. As a result, this report has determined that the ‘Co-create by Sharp’ methodology produces a chain of benefits that begins with psychological benefits and brand-self connection, resulting in higher campaign delivery effectiveness. In conclusion, the ‘Co-create by Sharp’ methodology appears to be supported by a psychological mechanism that motivates participants to co-create in developing campaign strategies and brand building. Moreover, co-creating with stakeholders as a next step to gathering data with market research techniques could increase customer value in campaign delivery.
The researcher worked as an intern in the Sharp Agency to better understand the company’s way of work and the ‘Co-create by Sharp’ method. The internship allowed the researcher to be involved in various steps of the co-creation method: 1) Attend co-create sessions and observe participant behaviour (see Appendix K and Appendix L). 2) Develop post-co-create decks of information, including sessions’ outputs. 3) Participate in strategic brainstorming sessions. 4) Collate evidence of the final results of messaging and visuals for campaign delivery. A qualitative experimental design was used to investigate the research objectives and provide answers to research questions. Three types of interviews were conducted with different participant profiles, including co-creation participants, Sharp team members and Sharp clients. Interview sessions lasted between twenty and thirty minutes, using a pre-determined discussion guide for each interview and received ethical approval. Interviews were designed to gather insights about co-creation perceptions from every person involved in the process. A qualitative design allowed interviewees to express freely their co-creation experience with The Sharp Agency. Considering the research aimed to explore people’s attitudes, it would not have been appropriate to use a quantitative method. Instead, a qualitative design allowed for gathering a spectrum of people’s observations and feedback. Sampling Representative sampling was used to obtain results that reflect each participant’s profile perspective. Interviewing involved five participants from the latest co-creation sessions moderated by Sharp, seven Sharp team members with roles involved in different stages of the co-creation process (including founders of the ‘Co-create by Sharp’ method), and three company commissioning clients that represent market leader companies (i.e., Medical Protection Service, Barbour ABI, and Lonza). Considering that Medical Protection Service (MPS) and Lonza are part of the healthcare industry and Barbour ABI provides data and intelligence to the construction industry, these companies manage technical language and require higher accuracy of message delivery. (Ekiyor & Altan, 2021; Mokhtariani et al., 2017). This project received ethical approval under the auspices of the Lancaster University Psychology Department (see Appendix M). Participants gave informed consent using a consent form sent and signed via e-mail (see Appendix B). Participants were additionally provided with a debrief sheet, including contact details, should they have further questions (see Appendix C). Materials Interviews were regulated using three discussion guides (see Appendix E, Appendix F, and Appendix G). These were devised based on the objectives of the investigation set collectively with Sharp. Each discussion guide responded to a specific question based on participants’ profiles (co-creation participants, Sharp team members, and commissioning clients. Participants were encouraged to elaborate on their answers as much as possible. When conducted virtually, interviews were recorded using the current version of Microsoft Teams, and in person, interviews were recorded using Apple’s Voice Memo app. Research Procedure Participants were introduced to the researcher by The Sharp Agency and invited to participate in a scheduled interview via Microsoft Teams or in Sharp’s headquarters in the case of Sharp team member participants. The interviewer followed a discussion guide that began with questions that allowed participants to introduce themselves and warm up to the conversation. It concluded with questions that aimed to obtain the most robust responses. For further analysis purposes, interviews were transcribed using the Otter.ai software.
Advertising, Behavioural Science and Ethics: perspectives on the commercialisation of cognitive biases.
Advertising, Behavioural Science, Behavioural economics, Ethics
Increasingly, behavioural science in the form of behavioural economics is being utilised to increase the effectiveness of advertising communications. The practice of using known cognitive biases and lapses in rational thinking to help sell products and services prompts ethical considerations. Whilst sparking some passionate, albeit small debate, research has not included the voice of the intended target, the general public. The aim of this research was to provide an open and sensitive forum in which the public could share their ideas surrounding the use of behavioural economics with the intention of detecting the perceived ethical boundaries, fairness in their implementation, and ultimately possible resolutions. In exploration of this topic, five interviews and two focus groups were conducted to discuss these increasingly pressing issues. Despite judged as unfair in advertising, behavioural economics was seen as an unavoidable reality in the fabric of the advertising landscape, although the public seek increased transparency and information regarding the specific techniques being utilised, while requesting little from advertisers themselves. The public also take special consideration of vulnerable groups of individuals who might be particularly susceptible to such tactics, a conversation which whilst incredibly important, hitherto has not been discussed, consequently contributing valuable insight into the literature concerning consumer protection. Future avenues for research may seek to address professionals in the industry, as personal insight may lead to richer, nuanced ideas that could lead to realistic and actionable solutions. Additionally, research could involve discussion of other potentially invasive techniques, such as data tracking, and how these techniques may combine to construct a psychological and technological sphere of influence and what sort of provisions can be made to empower the consumer.
Participants Overall, 14 participants took part, encompassing a wide range of ages to collect a broad set of opinions (range 21-62, mean 34 years, five males, eight females, one non-binary). Five participants were individually interviewed, with two focus groups taking place afterward. A breakdown of the participants can be found in Table 1, in Appendix A. All were residing within Britain and were therefore familiar with British advertising. Due to the nature of the research, recruitment was achieved via opportunity and snowball sampling, to ensure those participating would be comfortable in sharing their private thoughts and their time. Materials A discussion guide was developed in order to assess the public’s views on the issues considered in this research’s objectives, comprising of open-ended questions that can be seen in Appendix C. Although following an inductive framework for analysis, this was not strictly adhered to in the formation of the discussion guide, a brief literature search was conducted prior to its development, as to provide some direction for rich and useful prompts. 15 The first section sought to break the ice, probe for ideas and assess the awareness that participants may have in relation to psychology in advertising. Then, they were informed through a short paragraph what behavioural economics in advertising would look like, in order that they understand the concept, parameters and focus of the research. The resulting feelings were explored. Sources for this explanatory paragraph encompassed academic journals (Kovic & Laissue, 2016) and quotes lifted from the website of ‘The Behavioural Architects’ (2022) (a leading behavioural science consultancy agency) in order to represent an accurate and unbiased picture of what behavioural economics is considered to encompass. Example ads were also included and shown to participants in order to foster understanding. There are 108 cognitive biases listed by Wikipedia, (Wikipedia, 2022) and this list is growing. In order to select the appropriate biases most relevant to advertising for the interviews and focus groups, examples were selected from ‘The Choice Factory’ (Shotten, 2018), a book authored by an industry professional to outline the most pertinent biases used in advertising, cross-referenced with the information pages of the ‘The Behavioural Architects’ who list the BE they actively employ in their consulting work (Behavioural architects, 2022). The biases chosen to be represented were Social Proof, Anchoring, Extremeness Aversion and Friction Removal. The questioning did not pertain to the ads specifically, but rather the techniques used. This can be seen in the discussion guide in Appendix C. For the specific ads chosen, in order to prevent bias and examples which may seem overly manipulative or benign, search terms were used. The bias name plus ‘advertising example’ was used and the first example that conformed to the bias and was a verifiable ad from the brand were selected. In order to probe the participants feelings about how their perceptions on the acceptableness of employing behavioural economics may 16 differ depending on the source of the ad, ads that used the same biases from charity organisations were specifically chosen to be presented alongside their for-profit counterparts. Procedure Ethical approval for the current study was obtained through the project supervisor and ethics partner at Lancaster University (Ethics Application can be seen in Appendix B). In line with this, all participants were provided with a copy of the participation information sheet, a consent form and finally a debrief upon session completion. Five individual interviews took place first to serve as a refining process to maximise the utility of the focus groups. These interviews took place online via Microsoft Teams to reduce friction to participation, allowing participants to select a time of their choosing within their own homes. Interviews were approximately an hour long, with some being extended with the permission of the participant if ideas still needed to be expressed toward the end of the allotted time. Video and audio were recorded, and participation was compensated with a £10 Amazon Gift Card. After the interviews, two separate focus groups were conducted, whereby the audio was recorded. The first focus group contained four participants, as a member dropped out, with the second containing the expected five participants. Refreshments were provided and both had a duration of approximately two hours. Although there was a discussion guide, the interviews and focus groups were semistructured to allow for flexibility and an adaptive approach. This was deemed necessary to reflect the exploratory nature of the questioning. The focus groups and the interviews were all solely conducted by the researcher. 17 Interviews and focus group recordings were subsequently transcribed and identifying information removed. Analysis To carry out the qualitative analysis, Braun and Clarke’s (2006) six-step framework for thematic analysis was followed: familiarising yourself with the data, generating initial codes, searching for themes, reviewing themes, defining and naming themes, and producing the report. In the generating of codes, open coding was used, meaning due to the inductive nature of the research, there were no pre-set codes, but rather they were developed and modified throughout the process. The adoption of this approach was decidedly the most appropriate, as it is considered the most influential method in the social sciences due to widely established clear and practical parameters (Maguire & Delahunt, 2017). This type of analysis is also highly accessible to the public; Unlike numbers and figures, the average person can relate to the thoughts and feelings of others (Braun & Clarke, 2017). Being about the public and for the public, an accessible analytical method was essentia
An investigation of the influence of individual differences on susceptibility to product placement.
Product placement, individual differences, cognitive capabilities, inhibitory control, age, familiarity, gender, timepoint, purchase intentions
Product placement increased in popularity in 1982 when Reese’s Pieces Chocolate was included in E.T. the film, which led to a 65% increase in sales. Still to this day product placement is omnipresent within our cultural climate and research has supported that it enhances our purchase intentions. However, what remains unknown is how individual differences may influence product placement susceptibility. To address this gap, the current study investigated whether individual differences in cognitive capabilities, inhibitory control, age, familiarity, gender and timepoint enhance/reduce the likelihood of individuals' purchasing intentions being influenced by product placement. To do this, 55 participants (23 younger adults (Mage = 61.62(8.70)) and 22 older adults (Mage = 21.75(0.68)) were presented with images of four cups of coffee and asked to rank their purchase intentions/familiarity with the products. Following this, participants watched three scenes from Coronation Street, with the second clip including a product placement (Costa Coffee). Approximately 48 hours later, participants completed another purchase intentions questionnaire on the same four cups of coffee. The results highlighted that purchase intentions increased immediately post-clip; however they decreased 48 hours post-clip. Therefore, advertisers may use this information to discover ways in which the consumer can easily purchase the product immediately post-clip e.g. through QR codes. In regard to all other variables, no other significant relationships were found. Thus, it cannot be suggested to advertising agencies that product placement targeted to individuals who fulfil a given criteria (e.g. older adults, etc) will achieve optimal results when compared to non-targeted product placement.
Design The present quantitative study adopted a repeated measures design. There were several predictor variables: overall cognitive capabilities (including executive functioning; as assessed by the ACE-III; Hsieh et al., 2013), inhibitory control (as assessed by the Stroop effect), age, familiarity, gender, and timepoint. The dependent variable was susceptibility to product placement as measured by change in purchase intention. Participants At the time of the current studies design no published studies had investigated the influence of individual differences on product placement susceptibility, therefore the required sample size was modelled on the most comparable study the authors could source. Specifically, Hoek et al. (2022) investigated the influence of inhibitory control on advertising literacy activation and advertising susceptibility. Hoek et al. (2022) recruited 57 participants. Given the time restraints of data collection, the authors elected to recruit 55 participants. A total of 55 participants volunteered to participate in part one of the study. All participants were recruited via opportunity sampling through word of mouth and through advertisements placed on various Lancaster University Facebook pages (e.g. the Perception and Action Lab group). Participants were either aged between 18-25 (younger adults) or aged 50 and over (older adults). Out of the 55 participants, there were 27 younger adults (19 women; Mage = 60.93; SDage = 8.26) and 28 older adults (18 women; Mage = 21.78; SDage = 0.85). No participant had a known diagnosis of a psychiatric, neurological, or visual impairment, thus psychiatric, neurological, and visual impairments were not included in the analysis. All participants were White British/Irish. Therefore, there was no variation between ethnicities, thus ethnicity was not included in the analysis either. Given that cognitive capabilities was a key predictor variable within this study, it was necessary to ensure that participants with a known cognitive impairment or probable indication of cognitive impairment were removed from the study. Subsequently, all participants were screened for the probable presence of mild cognitive impairment through the Addenbrookes Cognitive Examination (ACE-III; Hsieh et al., 2013). After applying the pre-validated cut off point, 10 participants were excluded. Therefore, 45 participants were included in the analysis. Participants were either aged between 18-25 (younger adults) or aged 50 and over (older adults). Out of the 45 participants, there were 23 younger adults (16 women; Mage = 61.62; SDage = 8.70) and 22 older adults (17 women; Mage = 21.75; SDage = 0.68). Materials Inhibitory Control Inhibitory control was measured through an online Stroop task developed and run through Psytoolkit (Stoet, 2010, 2017). Completion of this task required participants to ignore the meaning of the colour word and indicate the print colour. Participants were generally presented with a colour word and a print word that were incongruent to one another. Thus, participants needed to use their ability to inhibit a pertinent response (i.e. the print colour) and indicate the print colour, which would be done more efficiently by competent readers (von Hippel & Gonsalkorale, 2005). Previous scholars have chosen to use the Stroop task, as it offers a good measure of individual variation in inhibition (e.g., Long & Prat, 2002). As this study was conducted remotely, via Microsoft Teams share screen function, participants were asked to verbally indicate the print colour and the researcher pressed the related keys (e.g. r for red, g for green, b for blue, and y for yellow). Participants first completed four practice trials followed by 40 test trials. Cognitive Functioning Cognitive capabilities were measured using an adaptation of the Addenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination (ACE-III; Hsieh et al., 2013). The original version assesses the participants’ attention, memory, fluency, language, and visuospatial abilities and has a combined score of 100. Although the adapted version examines the same five cognitive domains, it has a combined score of 77, the reason being that some questions were removed, as they were not deemed suitable for an online study – the first two questions on attention, the first two questions on language, and the first three questions on visuospatial abilities. The original version's pre-validated cut off point was 88 (88%) and therefore the adapted version's was 68 (88.31%). The participants who scored below the pre-validated cut off point were removed prior to analysis to ensure that the presence of cognitive impairment would not confound the subsequent analysis. Demographic and Health Characteristics Demographic information, including age, ethnicity, and gender, and background health information, including whether the participant had a current or history of a diagnosis of any cognitive, neurological, visual, or psychiatric impairments, was collected through an online Qualtrics Questionnaire. Purchase Intentions Questionnaire Prior to the questionnaire, participants were presented with the name and an image of each of the four cups of coffee. Purchase intentions of the four cups of coffee were then measured using a 7-point Likert scale. Participants were asked to rate on a scale of 1-7, 1 being ‘Extremely unlikely’ to 7 being ‘Extremely likely’, how likely they were to purchase a cup of coffee from: Caffè Nero, Costa Coffee, Greggs, and Starbucks. Comparably, familiarity was also measured using a 7-point Likert scale. Participants were asked to rate on a scale of 1-7, 1 being ‘Extremely unfamiliar’ to 7 being ‘Extremely familiar’ with how familiar they were with each cup of coffee from Caffè Nero, Costa Coffee, Greggs, and Starbucks. Purchase intentions and familiarity were measured using a 7-point Likert scale, rather than the commonly used 5-point Likert scale, as the inclusion of several options enhances the likelihood of acquiring a more accurate response (Joshi et al., 2015). It was important that purchase intention and familiarity of Costa Coffee was assessed alongside alternative brands, so that it was not made apparent that the study was focusing upon the participants' purchase intention ranking of Costa Coffee only. Therefore, Caffè Nero, Greggs, and Starbucks were chosen alongside Costa Coffee, because according to a survey conducted by Lock (2022), they are the UK’s top four leading coffee shop chains. The images were provided by Adobe Stock (2019) and Dreams Time (2019a, 2019b, 2019c). Product Placement Video The British TV Soap Coronation Street was selected, as prior research (e.g. Armstrong, 2018) suggests that it is popular amongst both younger and older adults (YouGov, 2011). The first clip chosen was a scene from 8th January 2018 Part 1, lasting 1 minute 16 seconds. The second clip chosen was a scene from 29th January 2018 Part 1, lasting 1 minute 15 seconds. The third clip chosen was a scene from 7th February 2018 Part 2, lasting 1 minute 23 seconds. It was the second scene shown that included the product placement (Costa Coffee). The researcher screen recorded each clip from https://www.dailymotion.com/gb and saved them into an encrypted file on a password-protected computer. Procedure A member of the psychology department research ethics committee approved the study before it was undertaken. Participants were invited to attend a 40–50-minute online Microsoft Teams meeting on a set date and time agreed on by the participant and the researcher. To commence, the researcher shared their screen and aided the participant in reading the participant information sheet and consent form via an online Qualtrics Questionnaire. At this time, participants were informed of their right to withdraw up to 2 weeks after participating without giving any reason and they were told their personal information would remain confidential and would be stored in encrypted files (that only myself and my supervisor have access to) on password-protected computers. The participants were only able to progress into the study on attainment of verbal consent. Participants were then asked to disclose various demographic characteristics (e.g., age and gender) and details relating to their current health status (e.g., any cognitive or visual impairments). The participants were then presented with four images of cups of coffee from Caffè Nero, Costa Coffee, Greggs, and Starbucks. They were then asked to rank their purchase intentions and familiarity, on a seven-point Likert scale, with these products via an online Qualtrics Questionnaire. Following this, participants were asked to watch three short scenes from Coronation Street. The second clip shown included a product placement of Costa Coffee. The researcher then implemented an online Stroop task using Psytoolkit (Stoet, 2010, 2017). The participants were also screened for the presence of mild cognitive impairments through the ACE. After this, the participants were presented with the same four images and asked to rank their purchase intentions of these products via the online Qualtrics Questionnaire (see Figure 1). Approximately 48 hours after completing the first part of the study, participants were sent an email invitation to complete another online Qualtrics Questionnaire. Participants were first asked to provide their participation number, which could be found in the email. They were then shown the same four images of cups of coffee and asked to rank their purchase intentions. Finally, the participants were provided with a debrief form at the end of the online Qualtrics Questionnaire (see Figure 2). This debrief disclosed the small degree of deception involved. Specifically, it was explained that participants were not informed at the start that the study considered product placement, as this might have influenced the subsequent data. Participants were reminded that they had the right to withdraw up to 2 weeks after participating and were provided with contact details in case they had any questions. The participants' purchase intentions of the four cups of coffee were measured three times throughout the course of the two studies: pre-clip, immediately post-clip, and 48 hours post-clip. This was to see whether the participants' purchase intentions for the four cups of coffee, specifically Costa Coffee, had increased or decreased following the product placement clip and whether their ranking would withstand the test of time (48 hours post-clip). This is why the participant were asked to include their participant number in part two, so that the participants prolonged purchase intention (48 hours post-clip) could be traced back to their earlier purchase intention rankings (pre-clip and immediately post-clip). Figure 1. A flowchart of part one tasks. Figure 2. A flowchart of part two tasks. Data Processing Inhibitory Control Participants raw Stroop data were downloaded from Psytoolkit into a Microsoft Excel file and saved in an encrypted files on a password-protected computer. From this raw data Stroop effect (the average incompatible conditions response time (ms) - compatible conditions response time (ms)) and percentage error rate (which involved adding the total of incorrect and timed out responses and dividing it by 40 (number of trials)) were calculated. Stroop effect and percentage error rate were used as an indicator of the participants inhibitory control capabilities. Specifically, a high Stroop effect would suggest less difficulty in inhibiting interference and a higher error rate would suggest reduced inhibitory capabilities. Cognitive Functioning The scores of the ACE-III were added and entered into the Microsoft Excel file, which was saved in an encrypted files on a password-protected computer. A higher score was indicative of superior cognitive functioning. Demographic and Health Characteristics To ensure all demographic and health data was readable by R-Studio all variables were dummy coded using numerical values. So, for instance, to determine the participants' gender, they were asked ‘What gender do you identify’ and given the option to choose from one of several responses. Each response was allocated a number, for example, 1 = Man, 2 = Woman, etc, and this was entered into the Microsoft Excel document. Susceptibility to product Placement (change in Purchase Intentions) To investigate the susceptibility to product placement, two difference in purchasing behaviour score were calculated (one for short duration, one for prolonged duration). To calculate these values, the likelihood of purchasing the product value prior to watching the clip was subtracted from likelihood of purchasing the product value after watching the clip (either immediately post-clip or 48 hours after). A positive difference meant that purchase intentions had increased following placement clip. A negative difference meant that purchase intentions had decreased following placement clip. A difference of zero meant that the placement clip had failed to alter purchase intentions Familiarity The familiarity ratings of Costa Coffee were entered into the Microsoft Excel file, which was saved in an encrypted files on a password-protected computer. The higher the score, the more familiar the participant was with the product. Data Analysis To analyse the data, a linear mixed effects model was chosen. The reason being that the current study employs a repeated measures design, and a linear mixed effects model permits an analysis of hierarchically structured data (Baayen et al., 2008).
Assessing comprehension of health-related texts in non-native and native English speakers
reading comprehension, health literacy, individual differences, language groups
Background — Health written materials are more often complex to comprehend if they mismatch the reading ability of people in the target audience. We need to consider how to make text accessible, by considering individual differences that affect comprehension of written health materials. Surprisingly, there are very few studies that indicate how non-native English speakers and native English speakers differ in comprehension of written health texts. Methods — A total of 557 participants were studied in the present study. In the study, participants were asked to respond to multiple-choice questions that were designed to examine understanding of 25 health texts with different text properties. Each participant responded to tests measuring individual differences in demographics, reading strategy, vocabulary, and health literacy. Findings — Using mixed effects logistic regression analysis, we found that non-native English speakers and native English speakers have different accuracy of responses for written health texts. Effects of vocabulary skills and text readability were significant. These effects were different for different language groups. Native speakers of English with higher scores on vocabulary were more likely to make correct responses to written health texts. Native speakers of English were more likely to make correct responses to written health texts as text readability increased. Conclusion — In future, experimental studies should look at the effects of training to improve vocabulary on reading comprehension for different language groups. Alongside consider sources of variances due to individual differences and text properties for different language groups.
Design We conducted experimental research on factors that influence the response to written health information, aiming to answer the research question: RQ.1 How does the reader’s attributes such as age, vocabulary skills, health literacy, reading strategy skills, along with text features, interact to predict the comprehension of health information in written texts for native language English speaker and non-native English speaker? We conducted the study to test the hypotheses: 1. Comprehension will be better for people with higher scores on reading skill, vocabulary and health literacy. Comprehension will be lower as age increases. 2. Comprehension will be better for responses to texts which are higher on measures of readability, cohesion, word frequency, referential cohesion, and passive sentences. 3. There will be differences between native and non-native speakers. Comprehension will be better for native speakers. The effect of age, reading strategy, vocabulary skills, and health literacy will be different for different language groups. The effect of cohesion, readability, word frequency, referential cohesion, and passive sentences will be different for different language groups. Ethical approval. The data collection plan and study design were reviewed and approved by a member of the Psychology Department Research Ethics Committee. Pre-registration. The study has not been pre-registered. Participants Participants were recruited using primarily opportunity and snowball sampling. Participants were invited using social media such as Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp. We aimed at recruiting Bilingual/Multilingual Indian Residents (18+) who have access to the internet. We collected 201 responses, but only 112 participants were included in our analysis due to incomplete forms by other respondents. Our criterion for including participant data in analyses was that they had to complete 80 percent or more of the survey. We had 112 responses, but we did not test any of the respondents who were aged 100. We had three respondents who were aged 100 removed from our data set, leaving us with 109 observations. To enable a comparison between native and non-native speakers of English, we combined the data on responses from Indian and Chinese non-native speakers with data on responses from native speakers of English collected previously by supervisor Rob Davies. Thus, we had a large sample size of 557 participants for analysis. We did our final analysis on 557 participants with minimum age of 18 and maximum age of 81. Average age range in sample was 28, skewing towards younger population. The sample consisted of 392 females, 160 males, 1 non-binary, and 4 prefer not to say. There were 273 participants who spoke English as their first language and 284 participants who spoke English as their second language. All participants were debriefed, and steps were taken to ensure confidentiality and anonymity. Materials We collected information on attributes of participants and linguistic properties of texts to see its influences on accuracy of responses made by participants to questions related health information. To measure participants attributes, we assessed demographic details, and participant’s vocabulary knowledge, health literacy, and reading strategy. Health texts differed in their linguistic properties, as measured by word frequency, readability (Flesch score and grade level), number of passive voice sentences, cohesion, and referential cohesion (Coh-Metrix). Vocabulary knowledge. The Shipley Vocabulary Test (Shipley et al., 2009) was used to test participants' vocabulary knowledge as it predicts 39-45% of variance in reading comprehension (Landi, 2010). The test includes questions in a multi choice question format, with incorrect and correct answers. Each question contains a word followed by four options—one of which is the correct meaning of the word. The higher the points, the higher the level of vocabulary. Health Literacy. The Health Literacy Vocabulary Assessment (HLVA) developed by Ratajczak (2020), adapted for online presentation by Chadwick (2020) was used to test participants’ health literacy. The adapted version of the HLVA contains 16 multiple-choice word items. The test consists of multiple-choice questions with incorrect and correct answers. Each question contains a word followed by four options. The participant must select the correct meaning of that word. High scores on HLVA indicate high health literacy vocabulary. Reading strategy. To determine participants’ motivation for reading and understanding reading strategies, we used Calloway’s (2019) third sub-test: Desire for Understanding and Reading Regulation Strategies. The items have been developed to measure the extent to which readers are willing to expend cognitive effort to understand a written text (Van den Broek et al., 2001). A higher score on this measure predicts better comprehension (Calloway, 2019). Demographics. We collected participants’ demographic characteristics: gender (coded: Male, Female, non-binary, prefer not to say); education (coded: Secondary, Further, Higher); and ethnicity (coded: White, Black, Asian, Mixed, Other); age; native language. Health information stimulus text sampling. Comprehension passages are selected based on previous research paper by Davies and colleagues (in prep.) In total there are 25 comprehension passages. However, reading 25 passages in one sitting could lead to fatigue in the reader. Therefore, we created 5 sets of 5 comprehension passages. Each set contained 5 passages, which were randomly given to participants. The comprehension passages were then followed by questions in a multiple-choice question format. The response to each question is either right or wrong, which indicates whether the reader understands the passage. The questions have been constructed in ways to ensure that questions probed for the most important information in each text, such as who the information was relevant to, who was involved in diagnostic or treatment procedures, and the risks and benefits of different options. The questions were constructed in a manner that could not be answered by matching or referring to the text but required text-level and interpretation-level comprehension processing to correctly choose answer options (Kintsch, 1994).
This work is based on Kintsch, W. (1994). Text Comprehension, Memory, and Learning. American Psychologist, 10. White, S., Happé, F.M., Hill, E., & Frith, U. (2009). Revisiting the Strange Stories: Revealing McNamara, D., & Magliano, J. (2009). Chapter 9 Toward a Comprehensive Model of Comprehension. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 51, 297–384. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-7421(09)51009-2 O’reilly, T., & Mcnamara, D. S. (2007). Reversing the Reverse Cohesion Effect: Good Texts Can Be Better for Strategic, High-Knowledge Readers. Discourse Processes, 43(2), 121–152. https://doi.org/10.1080/01638530709336895
Excel spreadsheets - .csv R Script - .r
Advertising, Behavioural Science and Ethics: perspectives on the commercialisation of cognitive biases