Do inward and outward consonants and vowels have different effects on customer’s liking rates towards the brand names?
Consonants, vowels, MacNeilage syllables, brand names, liking rates
The origin of speech development starts with the way that infants or children produce their first words. In the early stage of speech acquisition, children tend to produce particular syllables that are low in energy to produce, such as intrasyllabic and intersyllabic consonant-vowel co-occurrence patterns (MacNeilage et al., 2000). Such patterns may have an effect on individual’s preference for words later in life, such as for brand names. More pointedly, according to Topolinski et al. (2014), there is an in-out effect which significantly affect individual’s liking rates towards the brand names that contain inward and outward consonants. However, previous findings have only focused on such effects on consonants, whereas there is insufficient research on the combination effects of consonants and vowels on brand names. Therefore, this study is designed to investigate whether such in-out effects of both consonants and vowels of English brand names have association with customer’s emotional response to the words, as well as whether the involvement of MacNeilage syllables in the brand names are associated with customer’s liking rate. The whole experiment was conducted through an online questionnaire consisting of 360 sound stimuli to test on participant’s liking rate towards the brand names which are non-words with the combination of inward and outward consonants and vowels, and Macneilage syllables. Results of the study showed that liking rates towards the brand names are significantly increased for the ones that include inward consonants and vowels, while lower liking rates were associated with outward consonants and vowels. Not to mention, no significant relationship was found between the number of MacNeilage syllables and one’s preference towards the brand names, yet individuals had higher preference for brand names that contained MacNeilage syllables as the first syllable of the word.
Participants A total of 51 participants who spoke different first languages were recruited through researcher’s family and friends as well as invited via SONA. They were all healthy individuals with normal vision and hearing, all aged 18 or above with no health conditions. The participants included 23 males and 28 females, with the age range from 22 to 28 and a mean age of 23.33, SD=. Materials The study was carried out as an online questionnaire which consisted of four open ended questions at the beginning and 360 questions with a 10-point Likert scale to display the answers. The whole questionnaire was based on the liking rate of the brand names that were presented as sound stimuli displayed in the questionnaire. The first four open ended questions were designed to ask participants’ age, gender, first language and whether they speak other languages (see Appendix D). Next, 360 questions each containing an audio of a sound stimulus that was between one to three seconds were presented in the questionnaire (see Appendix D). All sound stimuli were recorded by the researcher’s supervisor who was a native English speaker with a Northern English accent with training in phonology beforehand, which were also produced in a monotone. Within the 360 sound stimuli, they were divided into six different sets which included six combinations of inward and outward consonants and vowels. The total six sets of stimuli included nonwords that contained consonants that required the articulation from front to the middle to back of the mouth (inward) (FMB), from front to back to middle (FBM), from middle to front to back (MFB), from middle to back to front (MBF), from back to middle to front (outward) (BMF) and from back to front to middle (BFM). There was a total of 60 stimuli with the same articulation of consonants and different articulation of vowels in each set, and 10 stimuli with the same articulation of both consonants and vowels in each set. Within each set of the same articulation of consonants, six possible combinations of front/middle/back vowels were paired up with the consonants to create the stimuli so that every possible arrangement of front/middle/back consonants and vowels was tested in the questionnaire. Moreover, among the 360 stimuli, 120 of them contained zero MacNeilage syllables, 178 of them contained one MacNeilage syllables while 62 of them contained three MacNeilage syllables. To ensure that there was no personal bias towards the brand names, all stimuli were nonwords that were created by the researcher so that participants would not be familiar with any of the brand names. Procedure Before the study began, all participants were sent a participant information sheet and consent form through email (see Appendix A & B). Participants were then also given a link to the online questionnaire which was attached in the same email. At the beginning of the questionnaire, four open-ended questions on personal information were presented and participants were asked to answer their age, gender, first language and whether they speak other languages (see Appendix D). After completing the four questions, participants had to answer 360 questions with each containing an audio of a sound stimuli, which were referred as brand names in this survey. Each question was displayed as ‘how much do you like this brand name’ and participants were asked to rate each sound stimuli according to their preference on the 10-point Likert scale, labelled as 1 as the lowest and 10 as the highest (see Appendix D). There was a ‘play’ button in every question where participants could play the sound stimulus and they were allowed to play the audio as many times as they prefer if they wished. In the questionnaire, five questions were presented on each page and there was 73 pages in total, including one page in the beginning for the four open-ended questions. The 360 questions on the sound stimuli were presented in randomised order for each participant to ensure there were no order effects relating to individual stimuli in the data. The whole study took around 20 to 30 minutes depending on whether the participants replayed the audios or not. After completing the questionnaire, all participants were delivered a debrief sheet via email, allowing them to ask any questions regarding the study (see Appendix C). Ethics The study was granted ethics approval on 19/05/2022. Both a participants information sheet and consent form were delivered to all participants before the study began to indicate their rights to withdraw up to three weeks after participating in the experiment if they had changed their minds. After completion of the questionnaire, a debrief sheet was sent out to participants to allow them to raise questions regarding the study. They were also informed that their participation was confidential, with all data stored in encrypted files.
A Match Made in Heaven? The Effect of Congruency Between Accent and Promoted Product in Radio Adverts
Research consistently shows that accents are powerful social cues used in our everyday interactions as well as in advertisements; they can change how we perceive others and potentially also associated products or brands. Recent studies have explored the effect of congruency between the accent of the speaker in adverts and the country-of-origin of the advertised products. Yet the findings from research on the congruency effect is mixed and sparse. Therefore, this study investigated further into the effect of congruency. Participants were randomly assigned to one of four experimental conditions. The study employed a 2 (Accent: Northern English vs. Italian) x 2 (Product: fish and chips vs. pizza) between participant design. In doing this, two adverts had a congruent accent-product pair (e.g., Northern English speaker advertising a fish and chips brand) and two ads were accent-product incongruent (e.g., Northern English speaker advertising a pizza brand). After listening to the ads, participants then completed a questionnaire which measured participants’ brand memory, attention to the ad, purchase intentions, perceived similarity to the speaker and evaluations of the brand, advert and speaker. The results showed no congruency effect, however other striking findings were revealed that will be discussed in this paper.
This study used a 2 (Accent: Northern English vs. Italian) x 2 (Product: fish and chips vs. pizza) between subject design. The dependant variables were participants’ attention to the ad, memorability of the advertised brand name, purchase intentions, evaluations of the speaker, and attitude towards the ad and brand. Additionally, the evaluations of the speaker included their perceived warmth, competence, sociointellectual status, aesthetic qualities, and dynamism traits. Participants Through opportunity sampling, 82 participants were recruited. This sample comprised of 29 males and 53 females. Participants were randomly assigned to one of the four conditions. The participants’ age ranged from 19 to 65 (Mage = 25.5 years, SDage = 10.8). All but one participant were native speakers of English. Materials Radio Advertisements. For this experiment, four radio adverts were created (see Appendix A). Two ads were accent-product congruent (Italian accent and pizza, Northern English accent and fish and chips) and two ads were accent-product incongruent (Italian accent and fish and chips, Northern English accent and pizza). In order to create the adverts, two male speakers were recruited. One of the speakers spoke with an authentic Northern English accent and one of the speakers spoke with an authentic Italian accent, both spoke at similar paces with no major differences in their tone of voice. Questionnaire. The questionnaire used in the experiment was created via the survey software, Qualtrics. The questionnaire took approximately 10 minutes to complete. The items and scales used to measure the dependent variables are discussed below. Brand attitude. Participants’ attitude towards the advertised brand was measured using a 4-item, 7-point bipolar scale used in Liu, Wen, Wei. and Zhao’s (2013) study (ɑ = .92). See Appendix B for the full subscale. Ad attitude. Participants’ attitude towards the advert subscale was taken from Lalwani, Lwin, and Li’s (2005) study. The participants were asked to rate the radio advert using 4-items with 7-point bipolar scales (ɑ = .87). See Appendix C. Attention to the ad. Also taken from Lalwani et al.’s (2005) study, were 3- items with 7-point likert scales to measure participants’ attention to the ad (ɑ = .24). The Cronbach’s alpha score was low however removing items did not increase the alpha significantly to represent a robust measure. See Appendix D. Purchase intentions. In addition, based on the scales used in Hornikx, van Meurs, and Hof’s (2013) research, the questionnaire included 3-items with 7-point bipolar scales to measure participants’ purchase intentions (ɑ = .88). See Appendix E. Competence and warmth. The questionnaire included questions which measured the perceived competence and warmth of the speaker. The 9-items for competence (ɑ = .90) and 9-items for warmth (ɑ = .92) were presented together. The scale used for the items were 7-point likert scales (1= Strongly Disagree, 7= Strongly Agree), taken from Rudman and Glick’s (1999) study. The list of items used can be found in Appendix F and G, respectively. Socio-intellectual status, aestheticism and dynamism. Also, the questionnaire included the Speech Dialect Attitudinal Scale by Mulac (1975, 1976). This consisted of 12-items (four items for each subscale) with 7-point bipolar scales measuring the participants’ perceived socio-intellectual status (ɑ = .85), aestheticism (ɑ = .85), and dynamism of the speaker (ɑ = .76). See Appendix H. Similarity. To measure participants’ perceived similarity to the speaker in the ad, the questionnaire included 3-items with 7-point likert scales (ɑ = .80) taken from Lalwani et al.’s (2005) questionnaire. See Appendix I. Manipulation check. The questionnaire examined if participants correctly identified the accent used by the speaker in the ad. Participants were asked “What was the accent of the speaker in the ad?”. Memorability of the brand name. At the end of the questionnaire the participants were asked the open-ended question “Please write down the product’s brand name that was advertised in the radio ad you listened to.”. Additional questions. The questionnaire included additional questions which investigated whether any factor other than accent affected participants’ responses. These questions consisted of 7-point bipolar scales, 7-point likert scales, unipolar scales, and open-ended questions (see Appendix J). The questions measured the comprehensibility of the speaker in the ad, participants’ attitudes towards the accent, accent of the participant, likability of the advertised products, hunger, and native language of the participant. The questionnaire also asked demographic questions. Procedure After giving the informed consent, participants were randomly assigned to an experimental condition and sent the link to the Qualtrics questionnaire. At the beginning of the questionnaire the radio ad was played followed by the questions. The order in which the items were presented were brand attitude, ad attitude, attention to ad, purchase intentions, warmth, and competence, socio-intellectual status of speaker, aestheticism of speaker, dynamism of speaker, similarity to speaker, comprehensibility of speaker, accent of the speaker, attitude towards the ad, accent of the participant, likeability of the advertised product, frequency of eating advertised product, hunger of participant, participants’ first language, brand name memorability, and finally followed by the demographic questions. On completion of the questionnaire, participants were thanked and debriefed. Analysis A multivariate ANOVA was used to test the main and interaction effects of accent and product on participants’ evaluations. Also, separate univariate ANOVAs were conducted to explore if there were any covariate effects on participants attention to the ad, brand memorability, evaluations of brand, ad or speaker. The covariate variables were participants’ perceived similarity to the speaker, comprehensibility of the speaker, participants’ attitude towards the speaker’s accent, hunger, frequency of, and likability of eating the advertised product.
A review of the PEACE interview model training and implementation in real-life interviews
PEACE model, Interviewing, Investigation, Interrogation, Training, Evaluation, Interviewing techniques, PEACE model training
Police officers in England and Wales are trained to conduct interviews in line with the PEACE model of interviewing, however, the level of implementation of the PEACE procedures can vary between organisations and over time. The present study aimed to review the quality of current PEACE model interviewing training and its implementation into interviewing practice. Initially, in Study One, 62 training feedback forms from the Cumbria police force were analysed using thematic analysis to gain an overview of the training’s strengths and weaknesses. In Study Two, 30 interviews from 10 officers trained on these courses were analysed, to see if reported intention to implement the PEACE model and techniques learnt during training were transferred into real-life interviewing practice. Data from Study One indicated that the course was satisfactorily structured and presented, with data from Study Two showing improvement for most Tier-2 interviewers interviewing abilities after training, though some interviewers failed to implement concepts and techniques covered on the training course. Potential explanations for these findings and ways to improve the transference of skills from interviewing training are discussed.
Study One Method Participants All 62 participants undertook either a Tier-2 or Tier-3 interviewing course with the Cumbria police force. Participants were currently serving officers of constable rank or higher, of which, 34 were female and 28 were male. There was considerable variance in years of service between Tier-2 interviewers and Tier-3 interviewers, though no exact measure of years of service or age was included with the data provided. Materials Data The 62 training evaluation forms were provided to the researcher by the Cumbria police force, and were from either the Tier-2 investigative interviewing or the Tier-3 investigative interviewing course. The forms contained two scales indicating levels of confidence in conducting interviews before and after receiving the training, with a further four scales indicating levels of agreement with questions relevant to the study, and a single “Yes or No” question indicating if the participant was satisfied with the training received overall (see Appendix A for the full list of questions and exact wording). For all six scales, participants rated their strength of agreement with the statement using a scale of one to five (Likert, 1932). Three open questions were included on the form that stated: “If you have any other comments about this training please record them here”, “Are there any elements of the course did you not find useful or feel require further explanation?”, “If you have any other comments to make about this course please record them below.” Ethics Ethical approval was granted by a member of the Lancaster University Psychology department before data collection and analysis began. Data was collected by the Cumbria police force with all participants consenting to complete the feedback forms with the knowledge that their comments would be evaluated to improve the training courses. All course evaluation forms were reviewed by the researcher in a secure location at Cumbria police force headquarters, with findings being stored on the secure Lancaster University OneDrive system. No information that could allow an individual to be personally identified has been included in this report. Study Two Participants Five interviewers who had undertaken the Tier-2 interview training course with the Cumbria police force and five interviewers who had undertaken the Tier-3 interview training course with the Cumbria police force were randomly selected from the sample of 62 officers who had completed the evaluation forms used in Study One. At the time of writing, no officer had undertaken further training than the course ascribed to them. Six officers were female with four being male. As in Study One, no age data was available to record. On average Tier2 trained interviewers had 2.6 years of interviewing experience (SD = 0.8) with a range of two to four years of experience, whilst Tier-3 trained interviewers had 6.4 years of interviewing experience (SD = 3.93), with a considerably wider range of between three and 14 years of experience. Materials Data Thirty interview videos were reviewed by the researcher, three from each interviewer with one interview being before training, one being as close as possible after training and one being the most recent interview that the interviewer had conducted. Of these interviews, only two were conducted with victims and 28 were conducted with suspects, with both victim interviews being conducted by Tier-3 officers. Interviews covered a wide range of offences, with eight counts of assault, three shoplifting, two of burglary, two of possession of illegal drugs, two of criminal damage, one of resisting arrest, seven of sexual assault, six of rape, and one accessory to murder. Tier-2 interviews on average lasted 21 minutes (SD = 12.29) with the shortest being only five minutes and the longest being 52 minutes, whilst Tier-3 interviews lasted on average 56 minutes (SD = 18.82) with the shortest being 18 minutes and the longest being 86 minutes. Tier-2 interviewers’ most recent interview was on average 275.4 days (SD = 182.69) after training, and the closest interview to their training date with on average 52.2 days (SD = 41.33) after completing the training. Tier-3 interviewers’ most recent interview was on average 340.2 days (SD = 64.39) after training, and the closest interview to their training date with on average 36.8 days (SD = 21.07) after completing the training. Procedure The interview footage was provided by the Cumbria police force on a secure internet system only accessible from the Cumbria police station (the researcher took anonymised notes, and no video recordings or other personally identifiable information left the secure system). From the available interview recordings, footage was selected to be as close as possible to before and after the interviewer’s training date, as well as the most recent interview where the interviewer acted as the lead or sole interviewer. These were used to ensure the recordings gave a clear indication of pre-training ability, immediate post-training ability, and to see if training abilities were improved by the interviewing courses—as well as to check if these improvements continued after a long period since the training. Notes were subsequently coded into four categories for adherence to the PEACE model and techniques were tallied whenever used; 1) examples of preparation, 2) establishment of rapport, 3) appropriate use of the account, clarify and challenge phase and 4) the inclusion of a closure phase. The evaluation phase (where interviewers are given feedback on their performance) of the PEACE model wasn’t included in this study, as this process wasn’t included in the footage of the interviews. The development of the categories and the categorisation of behaviours was informed by the PEACE model training research by Hall (1997) and Clarke and Milne (2001). Examples of preparation included behaviours such as highlighting new information that did not refer to notes or inference, preparation of questions and a clear understanding of the interviewee’s circumstances and case. The establishment of rapport was noted when interviewers used jokes or friendly language, open and trusting body language (eye contact, open posture, mirroring of behaviour, Sandler & Lillo-Martin, 2006), or showed concern or interest in the interviewees’ needs, such as asking if they needed refreshments or asking how they felt. Appropriate use of the account, clarify and challenge phase was categorised by interviewers allowing the interviewee time to give an account (following the 80-20 rule of conversation management, Shepherd, 2007), clarifying unclear statements through summarising or re-asking questions, and asking questions which challenged accounts given by the interviewee. The inclusion of a closure phase was noted by the use of summarising accounts at the end of an interview, explaining what will happen after the interview concludes and giving the interviewee time to ask questions or provide further comments. The use of techniques mentioned on the evaluation forms as being taught and as seen on the courses syllabuses were recorded. These techniques were the use of the SER3 notetaking system, the use of silence, the use of a second interviewer, the use of open-ended questions, bad character warnings and special warnings. The counts for both adherence to the PEACE model and techniques utilised were subsequently tallied and compared between Tier2 and Tier-3 interviewers. Obtainment of a confession was not recorded in the data, as interviewees often enter an interview knowing if they intend to confess or not (Milne & Bull, 1999), and interviews repeatedly stifled by “No comment” responses would incorrectly be reported as failures. Ethics Ethical approval was granted by a member of the Lancaster University Psychology Department’s ethical committee and was approved by the Cumbria police force.
A Scoping Review of the Effects of Benzodiazepines on Emotions in Young People
Benzodiazpines, Young people, Children, Adolscents, Emotion/s, Emotional dsyregualtion, Non-prescription misuse.
Background: Benzodiazepines are primarily used to manage anxiety and agitation. While it is understood how benzodiazepines work physiologically it is not fully understood how these physiological changes cause the emotional changes. As this relationship is not fully understood, it maybe that benzodiazepines also affect emotions in ways not currently known, such as being a factor in emotional dysregulation. Objective: To conduct a scoping review into the effects of benzodiazepines on young people. To map the of the effects benzodiazepines have on emotions in young people and identify any links between benzodiazepines and emotional dysregulation. Design: A scoping review was conducted. PRISMA protocols were followed but other sources such as Cochrane and Joanna Briggs Institute were consulted to develop a framework. Results: This review’s findings suggests that benzodiazepines do reduce anxiety and agitation. However, the research concerning children and adolescents is limited, and suggests benzodiazepines maybe less effective than in adults. There are many adverse effects but despite this prescription use remains relatively high. Non-prescription misuse in adolescents is evident and globally prevalent. Only one direct link was found to emotional dysregulation, but other possible links were also found. Conclusions: More research into the areas of the efficacy of benzodiazepines in children and adolescents and the risks associated with paradoxical and adverse effects is needed. Possible links between emotional dysregulation and benzodiazepines misuse were made and research is needed to understand if this relationship exists and the effects. Any improvement in understanding this relationship will enable targeted interventions to be developed.
The search was conducted using the following databases: Web of Science, PubMed, CINAHL, Psych Info, Medline and Embase. Searches were dependent on the functionality of the different databases such as different key terms, different abilities to expand search terms and different limiters or age groups, these are all shown in the search terms document in the OSF repository. All searches were limited to English language. No further sources were used to supplement the search.
A secondary data analysis: How will the effects on accuracy differ when measuring individual differences in word reading skill in Spanish?
Individual differences, Dyslexia, Word property effects, Language orthographies, Reading accuracy
A deficit in accuracy has been found to correlate to reading difficulties (Davies et al., 2007). Effects of psycholinguistic factors and differences in language orthographies contribute to reading skills, predominantly in children with reading impairments such as dyslexia. The present study is a secondary data analysis of the original research conducted by Davies et al. (2007). The effects on accuracy of individual differences demonstrated by nonword reading skill and word property measures were examined in Spanish children. Participants were 110 students differing in reading ability from schools located in A Coruńa, Lugo, Orense and Pontevendra in northern Spain. The subjects were required to take standardized and experimental reading ability and intelligence tests. Eight lists consisting of 15 words each were created. The words were presented in five rows of three columns. Participants were asked to read the words as quickly and accurately as they could. Words which were incorrectly pronounced were identified as errors. Word property measures suggested to affect reading ability were selected and updated from an online database of Spanish words ‘EsPal’. Variables of frequency, length of words, neighbourhood size (Levenshtein distance), RAN, PROLEC-R nonword reading were investigated in the present analysis. Accuracy of reading scores was found to be significantly high for the sample. Effects of individual differences on accuracy were noted. Word property measures of frequency and neighborhood size were found to significantly affect reading accuracy. Effects of fluency (RAN) and nonword reading (PROLEC-R) were also observed. The analysis provides insight into plausible factors which contribute to reading impairments in a rule governed orthography such as Spanish. Results suggest that perhaps nonword reading skill could serve as an marker for reading difficulties.
Participants In the original study (Davies et al.,2007) researchers selected and identified three groups of children from an initial sample of 110. Children who indicated clear reading disabilities (DYS/ dyslexia), a control group consisting of children matched by reading ability level (RA matched group) to the DYS group and a chronological age control group (CA matched group). The present analysis investigated the whole sample of 110 participants and no group selection was conducted. Participants were students from schools located in A Coruńa, Lugo, Orense and Pontevendra in northern Spain. 110 children differing in reading ability and age were selected. These children did not obtain any prior diagnoses of impaired neurological or sensory-motor functioning. The sample of 110 children was required to take standardized and experimental reading ability and intelligence tests on different school days during a 3-month time. Experimental data was gathered in a single session focusing primarily on the experimental test, whereas the standardized reading test was given in a separate session. Measures Reading performance was measured across a series of ability tests (PROLEC-R, RAN). PROLEC-R Battery Tests of Literacy Skills Evaluation of reading processes for children is assessed through the use of the PROLEC-R battery constructed by Cuetos, Rodriguez, Ruano & Arribas (1996). The battery consists of Spanish tests analyzing reading processes such as lexical, semantic etc. Subjects were required to read from a list of 40 words as quickly and accurately as possible. Words differed on properties such as frequency and length. The scores obtained consist of a score relating to accuracy and reading speed when assessing words and nonwords. It has been suggested that the results of the test provide significantly more information when combining the PROLEC-R scores of accuracy and PROLEC-R reading times. This is why PROLEC-R nonword reading was computed into a combined measure. This was done by dividing accuracy by time. Rapid Automatized Naming Tests (RAN) Rapid automatized naming (RAN) refers to how quickly a child can read aloud a set of previously known items. These items can include numbers, pictures, letters, colors etc. A child’s performance on the tests is assessed by comparing their reading times to the norm scores of children in the same age. RAN tests are designed to predominantly assess fluency of reading. It is suggested that RAN influences reading scores as it requires the retrieval of stored phonological information (Johnson & Eden, 2014). Children were presented with a sequence of rows consisting of sets with different items (colors, letters, pictures etc.). The subjects were required to read aloud all the items from the list starting from top to bottom. Accuracy of reading and time it took for the child to name the words were recorded. Children with reading difficulties will be expected to present a delay in reading speed and accuracy, thus scoring low on the RAN tests. Word Property Measures In the original study (Davies et al.,2007), words were chosen varying on lexical frequency (high or low frequency word), orthographic neighbourhood size (many or few neighboring words) as well as word length (short or long in length) (factorial design 2x2x2). Updated word property measures were derived from the EsPal (“Español Palabras” meaning “Spanish words”) repository consisting of properties for Spanish words. The new word property measures derived from the database (frequency, length of words and neighbourhood size) were compiled together with the old data. The system is able to process different corpora in the same way. It combines a corpus which is derived from movie subtitles and one from previously written text such as Web pages, fiction, nonfiction writing etc. The updated measure of frequency is reported within the analysis with the databases original name “esp.count”. The ‘count’ refers to the number of times in which the word appears within the selected corpus. For orthographic neighbourhood size, all words are counted within EsPal and are in turn compared to other words within the corpus. Yarkoni et al (2008) argued that the orthographic neighbourhood metric (ON) developed by Coltheart et al.(1977) is limited due to the nature of its definition. ON is the number of words which can be developed by substituting one letter in the other word given that it is the same length. As a result, researchers have developed a new measure of orthographic neighbourhood size which is less restricted than the previous metric. The new measure is coded as Levenshtein distance 20 (Lev_N) (Duchon et al.,2013). Levenshtein distance refers to the average distance of 20 words which are found closest in text. LD is calculated as the number of edits to words (substitutions, insertions, deletions) which are needed to change one word into another. For example, the Levenshtein distance between the word “SMILE” to “SIMILES” is two, as it differs from the original by adding the letters “I” and “S” (Yarkoni et al., 2008). An updated measure of length of words was also derived from the EsPal database and is coded as “esp.num_letters”. This refers to the word length which is expressed in number of letters. Procedure Eight lists consisting of 15 words each were created. Participants were shown each list of words on a A4 sheet of paper. The words were presented in five rows of three columns. Participants were tested individually and were asked to read the words as quickly and accurately as they could. Words which were incorrectly pronounced were identified as errors. Three types of errors were identified: word substitution, nonword and stress errors. An example of word substitutions would be the word “nube” (cloud) which would turn into "neuve “(nine). For nonwords: “bigote” (mustache) would be “bixote”. For errors relating to stress “cáfe” would be “café”. All responses from 110 participants were computed and are present in the file: “SpanishR”. Accuracy is presented as the subject responses scored as correct and incorrect (0,1). Analysis Item level and subject level data about word properties and subject attributes were extracted. An analysis of the accuracy of responses as well as the effects of word properties on reading was conducted. Errors were scored as 0,1; correct and incorrect. Random and experimental variables were identified. Random effects were specified as “palabra” (words) and “subject identifier” (participant name). The experimental/fixed effects were specified as frequency, length, neighbourhood size, RAN, PROLEC-R nonword reading. To investigate correlations between the experimental variables a correlation matrix was constructed. Generalized linear mixed effects modeling (GLMM; Baayen, 2007) was used in order to analyze the accuracy of responses made by children to reading words. The distribution of variables included in the model relate to person characteristics and word characteristics. Moreover, GLMM was used to capture the randomness of the sample to increase accuracy of estimates for the effects of individual differences on word properties. The model explains the variation of accuracy by incorporating experimental and random variables. Model development followed a stepwise process, adding one variable to each model at a time. The primary model specification was as follows: accuracy~(1|palabra) + (1|subj_identifier), data = spanishr. A table of estimates of both random and fixed effects were created and analyzed in order to assess the variation in the models.
Data set belongs to Robert Davies who is the author of the original published study (Davies et al.,2007, “Reading development and dyslexia in a transparent orthography: a survey of Spanish children”.)
The present work is a secondary data analysis of the original research conducted by Davies et al. (2007), “Reading development and dyslexia in a transparent orthography: a survey of Spanish children”.
English and Spanish (Spanish participants, words, database)
Academic Resilience: Adversity and traumatic experience in an educational context at university
academic resilience traumatic experience resilience nontraumatic experience stress self-esteem self-efficacy academic performance
Resilience is a process whereby individuals bounce back or beat the odds despite the significant threat that can jeopardise their development. Academic resilience pertains to student´s success after educational adversity and their coping behaviour in challenging circumstances. Recently academic resilience became a validated psychological construct, and the present study uses this Academic Resilience Scale (ARS) to measure students response to academic adversity in a university sample with three analysis. The primary analysis: estimated the Life Event Checklist (LEC) or traumatic experienced and academic resilience which is unresearched. The findings indicated that students´ who have experienced a traumatic life event(s) and stressful situations are showing slightly more academic resilience than those who have not experienced a traumatic life event and stressful situations. A second analysis: academic resilience in a relationship with the life event, brief resilience, self-esteem, self-efficacy, perceived stress, and academic performance. Both self-efficacy and brief resilience predicted academic resilience. Third analysis: same parameters from the second analysis was utilised but now in a relationship with traumatic experienced and displayed that traumatic students had a more tendency for brief resilience, self-efficacy, self-esteem but perceived more stress than nontraumatic student´s. These results show that the academic resilience could be used as an intervention in the educational environment to enhance student´s coping behaviour and facilitate them to adjust more effectively in challenging circumstances.
Participants The sample was based on an internet survey of 154 Lancaster University students from 29 different nationalities who enrolled either as an undergraduate at first year (n = 47), second year (n = 49), third year (n = 30), Master student (n = 19) or PhD student (n = 3). Subsequently, five participants were excluded because of not being a student. The final sample contained 149 participants between the ages of 18 and 52 years old (M = 21.21; SD = 3.66). Majority of participants ethnicity was 51.6% British, 10.5% Chinese, 3.3% Indian, 2,6% South Korean and 2.6% Cypriot and other nationalities were in the minority. The principal investigator was not able to obtain gender because of a technical problem. Materials Academic Resilience Scale-30 (ARS-30) ARS-30 (Cassidy, 2016), measures academic resilience and is developed to estimate university students. Participants answer 30 statements of an imaginative vignette where a comment or feedback from a tutor about a low grade on an assessment that was presented. Participants imagine themselves being in that position and their response is confined to a statement: „You have received your mark for a recent assignment, and it is a ‘fail.’ The marks for two other recent assignments were also poorer than you would want as you are aiming to get as good a degree as you can because you have clear career goals in mind and don’t want to disappoint your family. The feedback from the tutor for the assignment is quite critical, including reference to ‘lack of understanding’ and ‘poor writing and expression,’ but it also includes ways that the work could be improved. Similar comments were made by the tutors who marked your other two assignments.“ Responses were on a 5-point Likert scale 1 (very likely) to 5 (very unlikely). Items include, “ I would not accept the tutors´ feedback”; “I would just give up”; and” I would blame the tutor.” Following the guidelines provided by Cassidy (2016), 9 of the items were reverse-coded (e.g., “I would not accept tutors´ feedback”). The author of the scale report high internal consistency (Cronbach´s alpha = 0.90). The ARS-30 has a theoretical range of 30-150, with higher scores indicating greater academic resilience (Cassidy, 2016). The internal consistency of ARS-30 in the current study was (Cronbach's alpha = 0.85). Life Event Checklist-17 (LEC-17) LEC-17 (Blake, Weathers, Nagy, Kaloupek, Charney, & Keane, 1995) is a measure of traumatic experiences and stressful situations which range from single stressful life experience to aggregates across multiple incidents. Participants respond to 17 items on 5-point nominal scale 1 (happened to me) 2 (witnessed it) 3 (learned about it) 4 (not sure) and 5 (does not apply). Example of questions, “Natural disaster (for example, flood, hurricane, tornado, earthquake)”; “Assault with a weapon (for example, being shot, stabbed, threatened with a knife, gun, bomb)”; “Sudden, unexpected death of someone close to you.” The measurement is usually used in a clinical setting to assess PTSD (Gray, Litz, Hsu, & Lombardo, 2004). In the present study, the measurement is merely utilised to examine if participants have experienced traumatic and stressful situations. Other than that, internal consistency of recent studies (Bae, Kim, Koh, Kim, & Park, 2008) is (Cronbach alpha = 0.66), LEC-17 also shows external reliability from r = .44 to r = .55, suggesting significant correlation with other measures that assess traumatic experiences and stressful situations in supporting of the scale´s construct validity (Gray, Litz, Hsu, & Lombardo, 2004). The internal consistency of LEC-17 in the current study was (Cronbach´s alpha = .90). Subsequently, the life event variable was divided into two variables (1 = Traumatic and 2 = Nontraumatic). Previous studies assigned participants who scored 1 (happened to me) as only traumatic individuals and 0 was assigned if any other responses option was endorsed and recorded as nontraumatic individuals (Gray et al., 2004). In the current study, participants who responded to 1 (happened to me) and 2 (witnessed) were combined as traumatic based on the effect of witnessing a traumatic event; it can not be ruled out how intense and excessive this experiences might be (American Psychiatric Associations, 2013). On the other hand, participants who based their responses on 3 (learned about it), 4 (not sure) and 5 (does not apply) was registered as nontraumatic. Brief Resilience Scale-6 (BRS-6) The resilience of participants was assessed with the BRS-6 and participants responded to 6 items on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (Strongly disagree) to 5 (Strongly agree), on items such as “I tend to bounce back quickly after hard times”; “It does not take me long to recover from a stressful event”, and “I tend to take a long time to get over set-backs in my life.” Three items were reverse-coded (e.g., “I have a hard time making it through stressful events”) to follow the structure of prior studies. The internal consistency of (Cronbach alpha 0.80-0.91). A higher score indicating greater resilience (Smith, Dalen, Wiggins, Tooley, Christopher & Benard, 2008). The internal consistency of BRS-6 in the current study was (Cronbach´s alpha = 0.39). Rosenberg Self-Esteem-10 (RSE-10) Self-esteem was measured with RSE-10 (1965) by evaluating both positive and negative feeling about the self. Participants answer ten items on 4-point Likert scale 1 (Strongly agree) to 4 (Strongly disagree). Example of items are, “On the whole, I am satisfied with myself”; “I feel I do not have much to be proud of”; “I take a positive attitude toward myself.” Five items were reverse-coded (e.g., “At times I think I am no good at all”). Reported (Cronbach's alpha = 0.84-0.86) (Tinakon & Nahathai, 2012). A higher score indicates greater self-esteem. The internal consistency of RSE-10 in the current study was (Cronbach´s alpha = 0.87). Student Self-Efficacy-10 (SSE-10) Self-efficacy was assessed with SSE-10 which is an estimation of the student´s belief in their capabilities to carry out, organise and perform a task successfully. The previous study by (Rowbotham & Schmitz, 2013) used a different way to measure with a four-point response format 1 (Not at all true) to 4 (Exactly true). Participants in the current research respond to 10 items on 4-point Likert scale 1 (Strongly agree) to 4 (Strongly disagree). Item example, “ I am convinced that I am able to successfully learn all relevant subject content even if it is difficult”; When I try really hard, I am able to learn even the most difficult content”; “I know that I can stay motivated to participate in the course.” Reported (Cronbach´s alpha = 0.84), and external r = .70 reliability and implying that students self-efficacy correlates significantly with similar measures of self-efficacy showing construct validity (Martin & Marsh, 2006; Cassidy, 2016). Scores ranged from 10-40 with higher scores representing higher student self-efficacy (Rowbotham & Schmitz, 2013). The internal consistency of SSE-10 in the current study was (Cronbach´s alpha = 0.85). Perceived Stress Scale-14 (PSS-14) Perceived stress was evaluated with PSS-14 which is a measure of stress quite general and consequently relatively free of content specific to any sub-population group. Participants respond to 14 items on 5- point Likert scale 0 (Never) to 4 (Very often). Related items are, “In the last month, how often have you been upset because of something that happened unexpectedly?”; In the last month, how often have you felt nervous and “stressed”?”; In the last month, how often have you felt that you were on top of things?”. Following the guidelines provided by Cohen, Kamarck & Mermelstein (1983), seven items were reverse-coded (e.g. “In the last month, how often have you felt confident about your ability to handle your personal problems”). Internal consistency of previous studies is between (Cronbach´s alpha = 0.70) (Lee, 2012) and (Cronbach´s alpha = 0.82) (Andreou, et al., 2011). A higher score indicates greater stress. The internal consistency of PSS-14 in the current study was (Cronbach´s alpha = 0.82). Academic Performance Academic performance derives from average grade from each participant, undergraduates at first year provided merely two marks at the second year and master students provided only part 1 mark. Both undergraduates at a second and third year offered part 1 mark and part 2 mark. These average grades were combined and used as a measure of their academic performance. Not all participants gave permission for obtaining their average grades, but hundred and three participants approved this inquiry. The undergraduate at first year with part 1 mark was (M = 62.6; SD = 10.0) and part 2 mark was (M = 71.9; SD = 2.33). The undergraduate at second year with part 1 mark with two participants was (M = 63.0; SD = 8.56 and part 2 mark (M = 63.5; SD = 9.42). The undergraduate at third year with part 1 mark was (M = 62.6; SD = 6.41) and part 2 mark (M = 63.7; SD = 7.05). Masters mark with merely part 1 mark (M = 68.7; SD = 5.41). The combination of these marks are measured as Academic Performance (See Table 1.). Cronbach alpha threshold Each questionnaire met Cronbach alpha level or internal consistency where the criterion is at .70 or above (Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994), apart from Brief Resilience which showed (Cronbach´s alpha = 0.39), even though will not be excluded. Procedure The methodology was pre-registered before data collection (see Appendix 1). After a review and approval from Lancaster University´s Psychology Department´s Research Ethics committee, the study commenced. Hundred and fifty-four participants were collected and answered an internet survey on Qualtrics (2018) but were reduced to a hundred and forty-nine. Participants were immediately informed of the purpose of the study without revealing the research hypothesis to prevent social desirability or to avoid demand characteristics. Participants were also enlightened that their data will be anonymised and treated as confidential and only used to understand who has taken part in the study. In the following, participants were given an explanation of possible risks in two measures, and for ethical issues, participants were told in advance that they would be asked about whether they have experienced any traumatic or difficult life events. For example in LEC-17 questions like “sexual assault (rape, attempted rape, made to perform any type of sexual act through force or threat of harm” among other questions in relation to recalling of events that were related to traumatic experience and could cause some inconveniences. Second, PSS-14 with a question such as “in the last month, how often have you been angered because of things that happened that were outside of your control?” could cause some inconveniences also in association to antecedent stress or stress that the participant perceived at the moment. Participants were made aware that participating in the study is entirely voluntarily and informed about the rights to withdraw at any time during the study without being penalised or being in debt to the Lancaster University by any means. Participants were also informed about the benefit of participating in the survey by contributing to a better understanding of academic achievement and how different events can affect the academic process (See Appendix 2). Therefore, after participants agree to participate in the study, the demographics were obtained such as which university participants study at, if participants responded to at Lancaster University, they were asked for permission of acquiring their average grade with dichotomous yes and no. Then records of age, nationality, student status (Undergraduate 1,2,3 year, Master, PhD, Other or Not a student), and what major they are studying (See Appendix 4). The participants were approached at the university campus regardless of locations and responded to six measurements with 87 items on an Ipad owned by the principal investigator(See Appendix 5,6,7,8,9,10). In the debrief part of the research, participants were informed about the purpose of the study and the study hypothesis along with short details of the literature behind this review. Additionally, contact information such as the principal investigator or supervisor if any questions were provoked afterwards about the research itself or anything related to the process of the study. If participants wish to discuss with someone outside of the study, information about the head of the Psychology department was also tangible.
Accessing Cortical Hyperexcitatbility and Its Predisposition Using Two Types of Measurements
This study aimed to explore in depth about the cortex hyperexcitability. In order to do so, the study will use the pattern glare task and three questionnaires. These three questionnaires include the Cortex Hyperexcitability Index II, Cardiff Anomalous Perceptions scale, and the Multi-Modality Unusual Sensory Experiences Questionnaire. The pattern glare task induces on-spot hallucinations and distortions, while the questionnaires measure the long-term daily unusual sensory experiences one may have experienced. In this study, both the questionnaires and the task measured the same underlying factor, the cortex hyperexcitability. In the sense that it was hypothesized that the predisposition of seizure-like hallucinations and distortions and of daily-based hallucinations and anomalous experiences should be associated in a particular way. The pattern glare task had two blocks in the experiment, one with a blindfold and the other without. They were presented to participants in different orders to counterbalance the order effect. In between the two blocks, the participants answered the three questionnaires. The result of the study showed no significant effect of the blindfold, suggesting that wearing the blindfold for five minutes neither increased the sensitivity of the eyes nor the visual cortex. Most of the relationships between the pattern glare and questionnaires failed to be significant. The investigation on the association between the predispositions of the two types of hallucinations also failed to show any significance, only MUSEQ and pattern glare has a significant correlation. The migraine and migraine with aura groups appeared to be more sensitive to the phosphene phenomena. Their sensitivity, though the results were not significant, could be clearly observed through descriptive statistics. Although the results and findings failed to prove the research hypothesis, probably due to the main limitation of the poorly presented stimuli, the current study to some extent was able to expand the current understanding of cortex hyperexcitability demonstrated by the previous works, and further offered more possibilities for future studies.
Along with the pattern glare task, there were three more questionnaires used in the study, these are MUSEQ (Mitchell et al., 2017), CAPS (Bell et al., 2006), and CHI II (Fong et al., in press). This study has been ethically approved by the Department of Psychology in Lancaster University on 11th May 2018. Participants The current study screened participants before they could take part in the experiment, the screening standard is whether they have been diagnosed with photosensitive epilepsy, epilepsy, or that they recently had a brain or eye surgery. This criterion was created as the viewing of the striped pattern of particular spatial frequencies may induce seizures in patients with photosensitive epilepsy (Wilkins et al., 1984). It turned out none were excluded due to disease or had a history of diseases. There was a total of 43 participants who took part in the study. Among them, 15 were males and 28 were females. The age ranged from 19 to 36, with a standard deviation of 2.92, and around half of the participants were native English speakers. The six participants who self-reported having a migraine or a migraine with aura were noted before the study, as the pattern glare task may induce or intensify their symptoms, which can cause visual discomfort, visual distortions, or a headache. Among the six participants who reported they had migraineur, three of them were migraineurs with aura. Stimuli and Procedure The current study used stimuli that were printed onto cards, and the stimuli were presented to the participants from around 50 cm away at eye level. The patterns were the same size at 20mm * 15 mm, all in black and white, and with the shape of the ellipse. According to the given conditions, the visual angle was calculated to be 12.84 degrees. The three questionnaires were all printed on paper, and the participants were asked to read aloud their answers instead of writing it down. The plain black blindfold which participants were asked to wear during the study was bought from the drugstore. Material There were three different patterns used in this study, the spatial frequency gratings for these patterns are 11 cpd (cycles-per-degree), 3 cpd, and 0.7 cpd respectively. All the patterns were achromatic, with a fixation dot in the centre of them. After each of the stimulus was presented, there were 17 questions which the participants had to answer. The questions asked about the intensity of the anomalous visual phenomena, the types of visual hallucinations, and whether they have a headache or dizziness after the experiment. The materials were adapted from the previous works of Braithwaite et al. (2014). The three questionnaires in between the two blocks of stimuli presentations were MUSEQ, CAPS, and CHI II. MUSEQ (Mitchell et al., 2017) has 43 items of six factors, including Auditory, Visual, Olfactory, Gustatory, Bodily sensations, and Sensed presence; the measurement is a five-point Likert scale which targets the frequency of USE. CAPS (Bell et al., 2006) has 32 items, also addressing the anomalous experiences from different modalities. For each item, if the participants confirmed that they have had related experiences, they then rated their experiences out of three five-point scales on distress, intrusiveness, and frequency. CHI II has 30 items, and each one will be questioned about its frequency and intensity. The measurement is a seven-point Likert scale, with zero as never or not intense and six as all the time or extremely intense. The questionnaire is the recently updated version of the original CHI, and the 30 items in it can be loaded onto three non-overlapping factors, includes heightened visual sensitivity and discomfort (HVSD), aura-like hallucinatory experience (AHE), and distorted visual perception (DVP). For the MUSEQ and CAPS, the original unrevised questionnaire was used during the experiments, however, only parts of the answers given was used in the analysis. This decision was made as the data analysis would be too complicated to take all the factors into consideration, especially when they are just partially related to the research question. Therefore, for the MUSEQ questionnaire, only Visual, Auditory, and Bodily modality were analysed, and for CAPs, the primary concern is exclusively about the temporal lobe experience factor. For the non-blindfold block, all three stimuli were presented; but for the blindfold block, only the medium and high CPD stimuli were included. The low frequency stimulus is excluded because it was too mild to induce any hallucination on the participants. Including it in the blindfold condition is more for its suggestibility; participants who have given a high rating for the low frequency stimulus may produce unreliable scores on the other measures as well (Wilkins et al., 1984). Therefore, participants with too high low PG value would be excluded from the analysis. Procedure Prior to the experiment, the participants were asked to sit in a specific spot where the distance between them and the stimuli was fixed at around 50cm. Then they were given the information sheet and consent form, which contained the information they needed to know in order to proceed with the study. On the consent form, there was a list of questions asking about specific medical conditions including epilepsy, photosensitive epilepsy, neuro and eye surgery, and migraine and migraine with aura. The researchers then confirmed that the participants did not suffer or had suffered from those conditions before the experiment could take place. The first phase of the experiment was the pattern glare test that comprised of two blocks, one with the blindfold and the other without. Participants were labelled with a number which was used as their order of participation. Participants with odd numbers had non-blindfold block first, and the ones with even numbers had blindfold block first. The numbering and manipulation of the block presentation were kept unknown from the participants. The blindfold block contained two stimuli presentation, one was the medium spatial frequency (SF), and the other was the high SF. The reason why the low SF one was not included is that it worked as a control in the non-blindfold block, as there is minor to no effect of this stimulus (Braithwaite et al., 2013, 2015). The blindfold wearing was prior to the presentation of the stimuli; thus, participants wore the blindfold for five minutes before the blindfold block. After the participants finished viewing each pattern, they would answer the 17 questions about the associated visual distortions. They were asked to read aloud the answers and the answers would be immediately recorded using a computer. There was no break in between each trial, and the participants would keep on viewing the next one once they finished all the questions. In between the two stimuli present blocks, the participants were asked to finish the three questionnaires: MUSEQ (Mitchell et al., 2017), CAPS (Bell et al., 2006) and CHI II (Braithwaite et al., in press). It takes approximately 20 minutes to complete the three questionnaires. After the questionnaires are completed, the next block of stimuli was presented with a blindfold or no blindfold respectively. After both of the blocks and the three questionnaires were completed, the debrief sheet was given to participants at the end of the experiment. The entire process took about 30 minutes for a native English speaker, for participants who speak English as their second language, the duration took slightly longer, at around 35 to 40 minutes.
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
Advertising, Behavioural Science and Ethics: perspectives on the commercialisation of cognitive biases.
Age-Related Changes in the Attentional Modulation of Temporal Binding
Ageing, attention, TBW, multisensory integration, stream-bounce illusion
In multisensory integration, the time range within which visual and auditory information can be perceived as synchronous and bound together is known as the temporal binding window (TBW). With increasing age, the TBW becomes wider, such that older adults erroneously, and often dangerously, integrate sensory inputs that are asynchronous. Recent research suggests that attentional cues can narrow the width of the TBW in younger adults, sharpening temporal perception and increasing the accuracy of integration. However, due to their age-related declines in attentional control, it is not yet known whether older adults can deploy attentional resources to narrow the TBW in the same way as younger adults. This study investigated the age-related changes to the attentional modulation of the TBW. 30 younger and 30 older adults completed a cued-spatial-attention version of the stream-bounce illusion, assessing the extent to which the visual and auditory stimuli were integrated when presented at three different stimulus onset asynchronies, and when attending to a validly-cued or invalidly-cued location. A 2x2x3 mixed ANOVA revealed that when participants attended to the validly-cued location (i.e. when attention was present), susceptibility to the stream-bounce illusion decreased. However, crucially, this attentional manipulation affected audiovisual integration in younger adults but not in older adults. Whilst no definitive conclusions could be drawn about the width of the TBW, the findings suggest that older adults have multisensory integration-related attentional deficits. Directions for future research and practical applications surrounding treatments to improve the safety of older adults’ perception and navigation through the environment are discussed.
Participants This study used a total of 60 participants; 30 younger adults (15 males, 15 females) between 18-35 years old (M = 21.37, SD = 1.30) and 30 older adults (11 males, 19 females) between 60-80 years old (M = 67.91, SD = 4.71). This sample size was determined via an a-priori power analysis using the data of Donohue et al. (2015) and Chen et al. (2021), who conducted similar experiments (see pre-registration on www.aspredicted.com, project ID #65513). All participants were fluent English speakers. Participants were required to have normal or corrected-to-normal vision. Participants were ineligible to proceed with the experiment if they had a history or current diagnosis of neurological conditions (e.g. epilepsy, mild cognitive impairment, dementia, Parkinson’s Disease) or learning impairments (e.g. dyslexia), or had severe hearing loss resulting in the wearing of hearing aids. Participants were recruited via opportunity sampling; the majority of younger participants were students at Lancaster University and were known to the researcher, whilst the majority of older participants were members of the Centre for Ageing Research at Lancaster University. All participants were able to provide informed consent. Pre-screening tools Participants were asked to complete two pre-screening questionnaires using Qualtrics survey software (www.qualtrics.com), to assess their eligibility for the study. Speech, Spatial and Quality of Hearing Questionnaire (SSQ; Appendix A; Gatehouse & Noble, 2004). Participants rated their hearing ability in different acoustic scenarios using a sliding scale from 0-10 (0=“Not at all”, 10=“Perfectly”). Whilst, at present, no defined cut-off score on the SSQ is available as a parameter to inform decision-making, previous studies have indicated that a mean score of 5.5 is indicative of moderate hearing loss (Gatehouse & Noble, 2004). As a result, people whose average score on the SSQ was lower than 5.5 were not eligible to participate in the experiment. Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly (IQ-CODE; Appendix B; Jorm, 2004). Participants rated how their performance in certain tasks now has changed compared to 10 years ago, answering on a 5-point Likert scale (1=“Much Improved”, 5=“Much worse”). An average score of approximately 3.3 is the usual cut-off point when evaluating cognitive impairment and dementia (Jorm, 2004), therefore people whose average score was higher than 3.3 were not eligible to participate in the experiment. The mean scores of each pre-screening questionnaire are displayed in Table 1. An independent t-test revealed that there was no significant difference between age groups on the SSQ questionnaire [t(58) = -1.15, p=.253]; however, there was a significant difference between age groups on the IQ-CODE questionnaire [t(58) = -13.29, p<.001]. Table 1 Mean scores on the SSQ and IQ-CODE pre-screening questionnaires, for both younger and older adults. Standard deviations displayed in parentheses. Age group SSQ IQ-CODE Younger 8.34 (1.10) 1.74 (0.51) Older 8.67 (1.13) 3.03 (0.09) Experimental Design This research implemented a 2(Age: Younger vs Older) x 2(Cue: Valid vs Invalid) x 4(Stimulus Onset Asynchrony [SOA]: Visual Only [VO] vs 0 milliseconds vs 150 milliseconds vs 300 milliseconds) mixed design, with Age as a between-subjects factor and Cue and SOA as within-subjects factors. The experiment consisted of 16 different trial conditions (Table 2), randomised across all participants. Replicating the paradigm used by Donohue et al. (2015), the experimental block contained 72 validly-cued trials and 24 invalidly-cued trials, which were equally distributed between each side of the screen (left/right) and SOA conditions; this means that each participant completed 144 valid trials and 48 invalid trials for each SOA. Table 2 Number of trials within each Cue and SOA condition. All participants completed a total of 768 trials. SOA (ms) Cue Valid (Left) N Valid (Right) N Invalid (Left) N Invalid (Right) N 0 72 72 24 24 150 72 72 24 24 300 72 72 24 24 VO 72 72 24 24 Stimuli and Materials Participants completed the experiment remotely, in a quiet room on a desktop or laptop computer with a standard keyboard. All participants were asked to wear headphones/earphones. A volume check was conducted at the beginning of the experiment; participants were presented with a constant tone and asked to adjust the volume of this tone to a clear and comfortable level. The stimuli used in the task were replicated from Donohue et al. (2015). Each trial started with an attentional cue in the centre of the screen – a letter “L” or a letter “R” instructing participants to focus on the left or the right side of the screen. In addition to this, 2 pairs of circles were positioned at the top of the screen, one pair in the left hemifield and one pair in the right hemifield. The attentional cue lasted for 1 second, and 650 milliseconds after this cue disappeared, the circles in each pair started to move towards each other downwards diagonally (i.e. the two left circles moving towards each other and the two right circles moving towards each other). In the trials, one pair of circles moved towards each other, intersected, and continued on the same trajectory (fully overlapping and moving away from each other). This full motion of the circles formed an “X” shape, with the circles appearing to “stream” or “pass through” each other. On the opposite side of the screen, the other pair of circles stopped moving before they intersected, forming half of this “X” motion. On 75% of the trials, the full “X”-shaped motion appeared on the side of the screen that the cue directed participants towards (validly-cued trials); on the other 25% of trials, the full motion occurred on opposite side of the screen to where the cue indicated, and the stopped motion occurred at the cued location (invalidly-cued trials). In addition to these visual stimuli, on 75% of the trials, an auditory stimulus was played binaurally (500Hz, 17 milliseconds), either at the same time as the circles intersected (0ms delay), 150ms after the intersection or 300ms after the intersection. The remaining 25% of the trials were visual-only (i.e. no sound was played). Participants were told that regardless of whether a sound was played, they must make their pass/bounce judgements based on the full motion of the circles (the “X” shape), even if the full motion occurred at the opposite side of the screen that they were attending to. The experiment ended after all 768 trials – participation lasted approximately 1 hour. The experiment was built in PsychoPy2 (Pierce et al., 2019) and hosted by Pavlovia (www.pavlovia.org). Procedure Prior to the experiment, a brief meeting was organised between the participant and the researcher via Microsoft Teams, to explain the task and answer any questions. Participants were emailed a link to a Qualtrics survey, which included the participant information sheet, consent form, demographic questions and pre-screening questionnaires. If the person was deemed eligible to take part in the experiment, Qualtrics redirected participants to the experiment in Pavlovia. Participants were then presented with instructions detailing the attentional cue elements of the task and asking them to base their judgements on the full X-shaped motion of the stimuli. Participants were asked to press M on the keyboard if they perceived the circles to “pass through” each other or press Z if they perceived the circles to “bounce off” each other, answering as quickly and as accurately as possible. Participants completed a practice block of 10 trials, then the test session commenced. After each set of 10 random trials, participants had the opportunity to take a break. Participants were provided with a full debrief upon completion of the experiment, and all participants could enter a prize draw to win one of two £50 Amazon vouchers. Statistical Analyses This study required two separate mixed ANOVAs to analyse main effects and interactions, investigating significant differences between groups and conditions. Reaction Times. For the first dependent variable of reaction times (RT), mean RTs were calculated for each participant in each Cue x SOA condition, representing the time taken, in milliseconds, for each participant to press M or Z on the keyboard at the end of each trial. A 2(Age: Younger vs Older) x 2(Cue: Valid vs Invalid) x 4(SOA: 0ms vs 150ms vs 300ms x Visual-Only) mixed ANOVA was then conducted on these mean RTs. Bounce/Pass Judgements. For the second dependent variable of the bounce/pass judgements, the percentage of “Bounce” responses provided in each Cue x SOA condition was calculated for each participant. A 2(Age: Younger vs Older) x 2(Cue: Valid vs Invalid) x 3(SOA: 0ms vs 150ms vs 300ms) mixed ANOVA was then conducted on these percentage data. Visual-Only (VO) trials were compared separately for valid and invalid conditions using a paired samples t-test. Post-hoc paired samples t-tests were also used to investigate significant differences between the 0ms, 150ms and 300ms SOA conditions. Bounce/Pass Judgements: Pairwise comparisons. To analyse pairwise comparisons in the significant interaction of Age and Cue, responses in each SOA condition were collapsed – that is, a grand mean percentage of “Bounce” responses was calculated by averaging the percentage of “Bounce” responses in the 0ms, 150ms and 300ms trials in the Valid condition and in the Invalid condition. This produced an overall Valid and an overall Invalid mean percentage of “Bounce” responses for each participant. A 2(Age: Younger vs Older) x 2(Collapsed Cue: Valid vs Invalid) mixed ANOVA was conducted on this collapsed data to investigate differences between the proportion of “Bounce” responses in the Valid and Invalid condition for younger adults, and in the Valid and Invalid condition for older adults. In addition, 2 separate one-way ANOVAs were conducted on this collapsed data (Age as the between-subjects factor, and Valid or Invalid as the within-subjects factor) to investigate differences between younger and older adults in the Valid condition, and differences between younger and older adults in the Invalid condition (Laerd, 2015). Significance. An alpha level of .05 was used for all statistical tests. Any responses (judgements or RTs) that were ±3 standard deviations from the mean were considered anomalous and were removed from the analyses. Mauchly’s test of sphericity was violated for the main effect of SOA, therefore Greenhouse Geisser adjusted p-values were used where appropriate. As an a-priori power analysis determined the desired sample size for this study, and this sample size was achieved, non-significant results will not be due to the study being underpowered. Statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS (version 25, IBM).