["itemContainer",{"xmlns:xsi":"http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance","xsi:schemaLocation":"http://omeka.org/schemas/omeka-xml/v5 http://omeka.org/schemas/omeka-xml/v5/omeka-xml-5-0.xsd","uri":"https://johnntowse.com/LUSTRE/items?output=omeka-json&page=13&sort_field=Dublin+Core%2CCreator","accessDate":"2026-05-23T09:55:31+00:00"},["miscellaneousContainer",["pagination",["pageNumber","13"],["perPage","10"],["totalResults","148"]]],["item",{"itemId":"64","public":"1","featured":"0"},["fileContainer",["file",{"fileId":"51"},["src","https://johnntowse.com/LUSTRE/files/original/d2dc5985e57b07e35905e64acb47b7b4.doc"],["authentication","3370ed59d929ffce6ca5d977ec62bb7f"]],["file",{"fileId":"52"},["src","https://johnntowse.com/LUSTRE/files/original/99408598e35363745a56c58e81430f29.doc"],["authentication","628eb1ba4a73e232e13333647109334e"]]],["collection",{"collectionId":"5"},["elementSetContainer",["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"1"},["name","Dublin Core"],["description","The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/."],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"50"},["name","Title"],["description","A name given to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"185"},["text","Questionnaire-based study"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"41"},["name","Description"],["description","An account of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"186"},["text","An analysis of self-report data from the administration of questionnaires(s)"]]]]]]]],["elementSetContainer",["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"1"},["name","Dublin Core"],["description","The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/."],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"50"},["name","Title"],["description","A name given to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1558"},["text","Assessing Inference Making in Listening Comprehension in Children in Special Education"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"39"},["name","Creator"],["description","An entity primarily responsible for making the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1559"},["text","Rebecca Hindle"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"40"},["name","Date"],["description","A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1560"},["text","2018"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"41"},["name","Description"],["description","An account of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1561"},["text","Successful listening comprehension involves making accurate inferences to interpret the meaning of a story. We assessed inference making in listening comprehension of children in special education in years 4, 5, and 6 (n=12). Children listened to short stories and answered questions to assess local and global coherence inference after each story. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed no significant main effects for children’s first responses for presentation type (whole, segmented) and inference type (local, global). However, after children had received prompts a significant main effect of inference type was shown with children performing better on global than local coherence inferences. Correlational analysis revealed no significant correlations between IQ and inference type but there was a stronger correlation between verbal IQ and inference type than non-verbal IQ and inference type. An independent t-test revealed no significant effect of diagnostic group on IQ or inference type but children in the Autism group performed better than children in the MLD group on both IQ measures and the MLD group scored better on both inference types. We conclude that inference type is important to consider when setting and asking comprehension questions along with the use of prompts to portray and assess children’s full comprehension ability. "]]]],["element",{"elementId":"49"},["name","Subject"],["description","The topic of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1562"},["text","Developmental Disorders"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"48"},["name","Source"],["description","A related resource from which the described resource is derived"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1563"},["text","\r\nParticipants\r\n\tThe participants were 12 children from years 4, 5 and 6 aged between 8 and 11 (N=12, 3 girls and 9 boys, M=9.67, SD=0.99) from a special needs school in the North West of England. All children had a statement of special educational needs including; Autism, Foetal Alcohol Syndrome, Moderate Learning Disability, Nonans Syndrome, Fetal Vulprate Syndrome and Speech and Language Impairment. All children were verbal with English as their first language. Consent was provided by parents/ carers, the Head of School and each class Teacher. \r\nMeasures\r\n\tIQ Task\r\n\tThe WISC IV was used to determine children’s IQ levels. Children completed one verbal and one non-verbal measure of IQ. The verbal measure was a vocabulary task, children were first shown pictures of items and asked what this is, progressing onto words asking, what does this mean? Children could score either 0, 1 or 2 points depending on the accuracy of their definitions according to the WISC IV manual. There were 36 items, increasing in difficulty, and testing stopped when children answered 5 questions incorrectly in a row. The non-verbal measure was a block design task, this comprised of 14 items starting with simple designs progressing to more difficult designs. Children had to copy patterns either demonstrated by the experimenter for the first 3 patterns or presented in picture format for the following items. There were time constraints for each pattern starting with 30s progressing in length for the more difficult items to 120s. Once children had failed to complete 3 patterns in a row, testing ended.\r\nListening comprehension task\r\n\tThe listening comprehension task was taken from Freed and Cain (2016) devised by the Language and Reading Research Consortium (LARRC) (2015). The full set of materials comprised 6 short stories however, for the current study only 4 stories were used: Grandma’s Birthday, The Game, New Pet and A Family Day Out. The stories were all topics appropriate to this age group. There were 8 questions paired with each story assessing both local and global coherence inferences; 4 of each. With questions either asked throughout the stories (segmented format) or at the end of the stories (whole format). In 2 of the sessions, stories were presented in a whole format and in the other 2 sessions, the stories were presented in a segmented format. All the stories were pre-recorded by Freed and Cain (2016) and delivered on PowerPoint presentation on the researcher’s laptop to ensure consistent delivery of the stories regarding pace and word emphasis. All stories were available in a whole and a segmented format. The format in which children listened to the stories was counterbalanced based on children’s IQ levels from low to high.  \r\n•\tWhole story format. Children listened to the full story and at the end were asked 8 comprehension questions. The delivery of each whole formatted story followed the same format. \r\n•\tSegmented story format. Children listened to the story in 5 segments. After each segment the child was asked either 1 or 2 questions with 8 questions in total. The delivery of each segmented story followed the same format. \r\n\tThe average length of the story was 157 words, there were no pictures included in the PowerPoint which the story recordings were presented on. This was to avoid children using the pictures to help them answer the questions. Children were provided with verbal prompts if incomplete answers were given to direct them to the correct answer. If children were still unable to answer full knowledge checks were provided, see Table 1. All prompts were pre-written to ensure all children received the same level of prompting.\r\nProcedure\r\n\tPre-test\r\n\tThe IQ assessments were implemented individually in a quiet room in two separate sessions. Each session lasted between 10 and 15 minutes depending on how many questions/ trials they completed. First children completed the vocabulary test then in a separate session completed the non-verbal measure, block design. \r\nMain assessment \r\n\tChildren were presented with 4 short stories on 4 separate occasions, each story paired with 8 questions. Each story had to be completed in a separate session due to the attention and engagement levels of the children being tested. Each session lasted approximately 10 minutes depending on children’s accuracy and speed of answering. The procedure was explained to the children at the beginning of each session using a script to ensure consistency. They were informed that they would either be asked questions throughout the story or at the end of the story. \r\n"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"45"},["name","Publisher"],["description","An entity responsible for making the resource available"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1564"},["text","Lancaster University"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"47"},["name","Rights"],["description","Information about rights held in and over the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1565"},["text","Open"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"44"},["name","Language"],["description","A language of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1566"},["text","English"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"51"},["name","Type"],["description","The nature or genre of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1567"},["text","Data"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"38"},["name","Coverage"],["description","The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1568"},["text","La1 4YF"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"42"},["name","Format"],["description","The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2133"},["text","Data/SPSS.sav"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"43"},["name","Identifier"],["description","An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2134"},["text","Hindle2018"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"37"},["name","Contributor"],["description","An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2135"},["text","Ellie Ball"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"46"},["name","Relation"],["description","A related resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2136"},["text","None"]]]]]],["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"4"},["name","LUSTRE"],["description","Adds LUSTRE specific project information"],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"52"},["name","Supervisor"],["description","Name of the project supervisor"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2137"},["text","Professor Kate Cain"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"53"},["name","Project Level"],["description","Project levels should be entered as UG or MSC"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2138"},["text","MSc"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"54"},["name","Topic"],["description","Should contain the sub-category of Psychology the project falls under"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2139"},["text","Developmental Psychology"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"56"},["name","Sample Size"],["description"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2140"},["text","12 Participants (9 boys and 3 girls- aged between 4-11)"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"55"},["name","Statistical Analysis Type"],["description","The type of statistical analysis used in the project"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2141"},["text","ANOVA\r\nt-test\r\nCorrelation"]]]]]]]],["item",{"itemId":"167","public":"1","featured":"0"},["collection",{"collectionId":"10"},["elementSetContainer",["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"1"},["name","Dublin Core"],["description","The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/."],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"50"},["name","Title"],["description","A name given to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"819"},["text","Interviews"]]]]]]]],["elementSetContainer",["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"1"},["name","Dublin Core"],["description","The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/."],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"50"},["name","Title"],["description","A name given to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3388"},["text","Advertising, Behavioural Science and Ethics: perspectives on the commercialisation of cognitive biases. "]]]],["element",{"elementId":"39"},["name","Creator"],["description","An entity primarily responsible for making the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3389"},["text","Rebecca Mitchell"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"40"},["name","Date"],["description","A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3390"},["text","2022"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"41"},["name","Description"],["description","An account of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3391"},["text","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."]]]],["element",{"elementId":"49"},["name","Subject"],["description","The topic of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3392"},["text","Advertising, Behavioural Science, Behavioural economics, Ethics "]]]],["element",{"elementId":"48"},["name","Source"],["description","A related resource from which the described resource is derived"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3393"},["text","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"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"45"},["name","Publisher"],["description","An entity responsible for making the resource available"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3394"},["text","Lancaster University"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"42"},["name","Format"],["description","The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3395"},["text","Text/Word.doc"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"43"},["name","Identifier"],["description","An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3396"},["text","Mitchell2022"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"37"},["name","Contributor"],["description","An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3397"},["text","Leah Murphy"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"47"},["name","Rights"],["description","Information about rights held in and over the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3398"},["text","Open"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"46"},["name","Relation"],["description","A related resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3399"},["text","N/A"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"44"},["name","Language"],["description","A language of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3400"},["text","English"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"51"},["name","Type"],["description","The nature or genre of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3401"},["text","English Text"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"38"},["name","Coverage"],["description","The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3402"},["text","LA1 4YF"]]]]]]]],["item",{"itemId":"172","public":"1","featured":"0"},["fileContainer",["file",{"fileId":"176"},["src","https://johnntowse.com/LUSTRE/files/original/eabca45b3b2b33796e43583fae08eeb4.docx"],["authentication","896ca77fc087dd982bb2dd80bb603845"]]],["collection",{"collectionId":"10"},["elementSetContainer",["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"1"},["name","Dublin Core"],["description","The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/."],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"50"},["name","Title"],["description","A name given to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"819"},["text","Interviews"]]]]]]]],["elementSetContainer",["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"1"},["name","Dublin Core"],["description","The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/."],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"50"},["name","Title"],["description","A name given to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3483"},["text","Advertising, Behavioural Science and Ethics: perspectives on the commercialisation of cognitive biases"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"39"},["name","Creator"],["description","An entity primarily responsible for making the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3484"},["text","Rebecca Mitchell"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"40"},["name","Date"],["description","A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3485"},["text","2022"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"41"},["name","Description"],["description","An account of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3486"},["text","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."]]]],["element",{"elementId":"49"},["name","Subject"],["description","The topic of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3487"},["text","Advertising, Behavioural Science, Behavioural economics, Ethics "]]]],["element",{"elementId":"48"},["name","Source"],["description","A related resource from which the described resource is derived"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3488"},["text","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"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"45"},["name","Publisher"],["description","An entity responsible for making the resource available"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3489"},["text","Lancaster University"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"42"},["name","Format"],["description","The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3490"},["text","Text/Word.doc"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"43"},["name","Identifier"],["description","An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3491"},["text","Braun and Clarke (2006)"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"37"},["name","Contributor"],["description","An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3492"},["text","Wenying He"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"47"},["name","Rights"],["description","Information about rights held in and over the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3493"},["text","Open (unless stated otherwise)"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"46"},["name","Relation"],["description","A related resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3494"},["text","N/A"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"44"},["name","Language"],["description","A language of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3495"},["text","English"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"51"},["name","Type"],["description","The nature or genre of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3496"},["text","Text"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"38"},["name","Coverage"],["description","The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3497"},["text","LA14YF"]]]]]],["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"4"},["name","LUSTRE"],["description","Adds LUSTRE specific project information"],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"52"},["name","Supervisor"],["description","Name of the project supervisor"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3498"},["text","Leslie Hallam"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"53"},["name","Project Level"],["description","Project levels should be entered as UG or MSC"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3499"},["text","MSC"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"54"},["name","Topic"],["description","Should contain the sub-category of Psychology the project falls under"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3500"},["text","Marketing"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"56"},["name","Sample Size"],["description"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3501"},["text","14"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"55"},["name","Statistical Analysis Type"],["description","The type of statistical analysis used in the project"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3502"},["text","Qualitative (Thematic Analysis)"]]]]]]]],["item",{"itemId":"100","public":"1","featured":"0"},["fileContainer",["file",{"fileId":"60"},["src","https://johnntowse.com/LUSTRE/files/original/eade41fda3588a9bbf652805dc6abab3.png"],["authentication","eafbd1067232f3da6799a0629d008bc0"]]],["collection",{"collectionId":"5"},["elementSetContainer",["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"1"},["name","Dublin Core"],["description","The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/."],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"50"},["name","Title"],["description","A name given to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"185"},["text","Questionnaire-based study"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"41"},["name","Description"],["description","An account of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"186"},["text","An analysis of self-report data from the administration of questionnaires(s)"]]]]]]]],["elementSetContainer",["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"1"},["name","Dublin Core"],["description","The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/."],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"50"},["name","Title"],["description","A name given to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2276"},["text","Understanding the Role of Academic Self-Efficacy, Social Support, and Anxiety in University Students’ Academic Resilience"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"39"},["name","Creator"],["description","An entity primarily responsible for making the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2277"},["text","Regan Kelly"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"40"},["name","Date"],["description","A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2278"},["text","2020"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"41"},["name","Description"],["description","An account of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2279"},["text","Academic resilience can refer to a student’s response when they are faced with academic hinderances, such as lower than expected grades. Those with a high ability to bounce back from hinderances have previously been shown to perform well during exams and have more positive mental health outcomes. Whilst a number of research studies have attempted to explain the academic resilience of primary and secondary school students, the factors that underpin university students’ academic resilience remain unclear. Therefore, the present study attempts to investigate the extent to which both protective and risk factors underpin university students’ academic resilience. The variables explored include academic self-efficacy; social support; and anxiety. Participants (N = 246) were all university students in the United Kingdom and they completed four self-report measures online via Qualtrics. In line with the hypotheses, a series of zero-order correlations showed a negative association between anxiety and academic resilience, while both academic self-efficacy and social support positively correlated with academic resilience. A multiple linear regression showed that the three predictor variables significantly predicted academic resilience and accounted for 41% of the variance. The findings lend support to a number of other recent studies that have explored characteristics of students’ resilience. Furthermore, the current study applied a context-specific resilience and despite the use of just three predictor variables, the most variance was explained in the present study. Whilst the study does have useful directions for both educators and future research, the use of self-report scales to measure a range of psychological concepts, that individuals tend to see themselves in a favourable manner in, does limit the study’s validity. "]]]],["element",{"elementId":"49"},["name","Subject"],["description","The topic of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2280"},["text","academic reselience, self-efficacy, social support, anxiety, university students, multiple linear regression"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"48"},["name","Source"],["description","A related resource from which the described resource is derived"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2281"},["text","Method\r\nParticipants \r\nThe sample consisted of 246 participants who were all students at universities in the U.K. After the exclusion of incomplete responses (N = 5); invalid responses to demographic questions (N = 1); and invalid ratings on scales (N = 7), the final sample consisted of 233 participants. There was 165 females and 68 males with ages ranging from 17 to 52 and the mean age was 24.3 years (SD = 4.8). Participants were primarily recruited through Facebook dissertation exchange groups and online participant recruiting software SONA was also used, thus a simple random sample was employed. To ensure the desired number of participants was reached, the chance to opt-in to a raffle draw for five £10 Amazon vouchers was offered to participants.\r\nMeasures \r\nAcademic Resilience. Consisting of 30 items and a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly agree) to 5 (strongly disagree), the Academic Resilience Scale (ARS-30; Cassidy, 2016) was used to measure academic resilience. On this measure, individuals read a short vignette and were asked to imagine themselves in the situation described. The vignette details how a student has recently received a number of poor grades and one fail and has subsequently received critical feedback. The items are presented as statements and these are grouped into three sub-scales (i.e., perseverance, reflecting and adaptive help-seeking, and negative affect), and consist of both positively (e.g., I would try to think of new solutions) and negatively phrased statements (e.g., I would just give up). A summed score of the three sub-scales was used as a measure of academic resilience in the present study and the scores can range from 30 to 150, with a high score reflecting a highly academically resilient individual. \r\nAcademic Self-Efficacy. Owen and Froman’s (1988) College Academic Self-Efficacy Scale (CASES) was used to measure academic self-efficacy. This measure comprises of 33 items and individuals used a five-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (very little) to 5 (quite a lot), to indicate how confident they feel when engaging in a range of behaviours at university (e.g., challenging a lecturer’s opinion in class). As this measure was originally intended for use with American students, certain words and phrases were altered to suit the present study’s sample who were all students in the U.K. For example, ‘professor’ became ‘lecturer’ and ‘math course’ was changed to ‘statistic module’. The scores on the CASES can range from 33 to 165, with a high score being indicative of those who are confident when completing academic tasks. \r\nAnxiety. To measure the extent to which individuals worry about their academic performance, the anxiety sub-scale from the Motivation and Engagement Scale (MES; Martin, 2020) was used. This measure consists of four statements (e.g., when exams and assignments are coming up, I worry a lot) and individuals used a seven-point Likert scale to specify how much they agree with each statement, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Scores can range from 4 to 28 and a higher score is indicative of those who tend to worry about their academic performance. Variations of this measure are available for populations in primary, secondary, and higher education from the author. \r\nSocial Support. The Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS; Zimet, Dahlem, Zimet & Farley, 1988) was used to measure individuals’ perceptions of their social support. This measure consists of 12 items (e.g., I can talk about my problems with my friends) and a seven-point Likert scale is used, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The items can be divided into three sources of social support (family, friends, and significant other) and scores are produced for each grouping factor. However, in the present study an overall score of perceived social support was used and scores can range from 12 to 84 – with higher scores indicating greater perceived social support. \r\nProcedure\r\nA total of four self-report measures was used in the present study and these were presented online using the Qualtrics software. Participants were initially presented with the participant information sheet and consent form – for participants’ ease, both of these were presented on the same page so that when participants were completing the consent form, they could refer to the information sheet to read what their participation would entail. On the following page, demographic questions were collated regarding the participants’ age and sex. Next, the self-report measures were completed by participants. The anxiety, academic resilience, academic self-efficacy, and social support scales were presented in a fixed order and each scale was presented on separate screens. Once participants had completed all four measures, they were directed to the debrief sheet which provided some background to the present study and also included a link to a separate survey, whereby participants could enter the raffle draw by providing their personal details. Although each scale differed in terms of the number of items used, it generally took participants between seven and ten minutes to complete the study.\r\nDesign and Analysis\r\nA correlational design was employed in the present study. A series of zero-order correlations between the dependent variable and each of the predictor variables were initially carried out, followed by a multiple regression analysis. The dependent variable was academic resilience and the predictor variables include academic self-efficacy, social support, and anxiety.\r\n"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"45"},["name","Publisher"],["description","An entity responsible for making the resource available"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2282"},["text","Lancaster University "]]]],["element",{"elementId":"42"},["name","Format"],["description","The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2283"},["text","RK Dissertation_August 8, 2020_07.57 inc. res reversed.csv"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"43"},["name","Identifier"],["description","An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2284"},["text","Regan2015"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"37"},["name","Contributor"],["description","An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2285"},["text","Aimee Fletcher\r\nEleni Gkari"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"47"},["name","Rights"],["description","Information about rights held in and over the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2286"},["text","Open "]]]],["element",{"elementId":"46"},["name","Relation"],["description","A related resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2287"},["text","None"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"44"},["name","Language"],["description","A language of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2288"},["text","English"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"51"},["name","Type"],["description","The nature or genre of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2289"},["text","Data"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"38"},["name","Coverage"],["description","The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2290"},["text","LA14YF"]]]]]],["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"4"},["name","LUSTRE"],["description","Adds LUSTRE specific project information"],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"52"},["name","Supervisor"],["description","Name of the project supervisor"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2291"},["text","Prof. Louise Connell"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"53"},["name","Project Level"],["description","Project levels should be entered as UG or MSC"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2292"},["text","MSc"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"54"},["name","Topic"],["description","Should contain the sub-category of Psychology the project falls under"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2293"},["text","social"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"56"},["name","Sample Size"],["description"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2294"},["text","246 participants: 165 females and 68 males "]]]],["element",{"elementId":"55"},["name","Statistical Analysis Type"],["description","The type of statistical analysis used in the project"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"2295"},["text","multiple linear regression"]]]]]]]],["item",{"itemId":"151","public":"1","featured":"0"},["fileContainer",["file",{"fileId":"150"},["src","https://johnntowse.com/LUSTRE/files/original/54ff2b32ca6ddc076571e720c7f80444.pdf"],["authentication","1c7c86c045532986fdad17219d9d6e82"]],["file",{"fileId":"151"},["src","https://johnntowse.com/LUSTRE/files/original/6ee62233e0839f9c2766d58b4b93b348.pdf"],["authentication","1c7c86c045532986fdad17219d9d6e82"]],["file",{"fileId":"152"},["src","https://johnntowse.com/LUSTRE/files/original/6bb01a175bd17e9527b8e3c400460fb2.pdf"],["authentication","1c7c86c045532986fdad17219d9d6e82"]]],["collection",{"collectionId":"2"},["elementSetContainer",["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"1"},["name","Dublin Core"],["description","The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/."],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"50"},["name","Title"],["description","A name given to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"179"},["text","Eye tracking "]]]],["element",{"elementId":"41"},["name","Description"],["description","An account of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"180"},["text","Understanding psychological processes though eye tracking"]]]]]]]],["elementSetContainer",["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"1"},["name","Dublin Core"],["description","The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/."],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"50"},["name","Title"],["description","A name given to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3115"},["text","Eye tracking and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD): Can eye tracking identify the feigning of ADHD?"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"39"},["name","Creator"],["description","An entity primarily responsible for making the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3116"},["text","Reva Maria George "]]]],["element",{"elementId":"40"},["name","Date"],["description","A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3117"},["text","7/09/2022"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"41"},["name","Description"],["description","An account of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3118"},["text","When diagnosing adult ADHD, it has proven difficult for clinicians to detect deceptive behaviour. Diagnosis of ADHD comes with economic, academic, and recreational benefits, which may account for the increasing feigning of the disorder. Current diagnostic methods: clinical interviews and self-report scales can be easily manipulated for a positive diagnosis. Hence the present study evaluated the utility of eye tracking devices to detect the feigning of ADHD. Eye movements of 38 participants (7 ADHD, 15 healthy controls, and 16 healthy feigners) were captured throughout the prosaccade and anti-saccade task. The performance of the participants on the task was evaluated in terms of latency and the percentage of error rate. The findings of the study reveal a significant difference in the latency of anti-saccade tasks i.e., feigners have an increased latency compared to healthy controls and ADHD participants. Because of the limited sample size, study findings cannot be generalized. Further investigations are needed with a much larger sample."]]]],["element",{"elementId":"49"},["name","Subject"],["description","The topic of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3119"},["text","Eye-tracking, ADHD, Feigning, Prosaccade task, Anti-saccade task, latency, error rate, eye movements"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"48"},["name","Source"],["description","A related resource from which the described resource is derived"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3120"},["text","Method\r\nParticipants \r\n Previous studies explaining feigning in ADHD acquired data from around 90-100 samples (Booksh et.al., 2010; Frazier et.al., 2008; Harrison et.al., 2007). The study therefore aimed to recruit 90 participants, 30 each in ADHD, healthy controls, and healthy feigners faking the disorder. Participants with and without a clinical diagnosis of ADHD were selected using the opportunity sampling method. A total of 42 participants between the age of 18-35 volunteered and were recruited for the study through the university disability service (11%), posters (16%) and through word of mouth (73%). Data of two participants were removed as the eye tracker repeatedly lost the pupil during recording. All participants were rewarded with an equal chance to win one of 6 £25 vouchers. Thirty-one of the 42 participants were healthy younger adult controls. Of the healthy control participants 15 (7 females; Mage = 24.33; SDage=4.32) participated as healthy controls, and the remaining 16 (9 females; Mage = 24.25; SDage=1.88) as healthy feigners. Seven ADHD participants (6 females) with a mean age 22.71 (SD=2.22) completed the study. The severity of the ADHD symptoms was analysed using the Adult ADHD self-report scale (for more demographic details see Table 1). The exclusion criteria include participants: 1) with any visual (other than corrected-to-normal vision) impairment 2) with any cognitive impairment 3) with additional diagnosis of neurological conditions 4) without a proper clinical diagnosis of ADHD. The exclusion criteria were applied because these impairments may interfere with the participants performance in the task.  \r\nPrior to data analysis, one of the participants was removed from ADHD group due to the lack of proper clinical diagnosis. Furthermore, a control participant was excluded with the assumption of having a probable mild cognitive impairment because the individual scored less than 82 (cut-off) in the Addenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination-III (ACE-III) (see Table 1 for further demographic details). \r\nParticipants \r\n Previous studies explaining feigning in ADHD acquired data from around 90-100 samples (Booksh et.al., 2010; Frazier et.al., 2008; Harrison et.al., 2007). The study therefore aimed to recruit 90 participants, 30 each in ADHD, healthy controls, and healthy feigners faking the disorder. Participants with and without a clinical diagnosis of ADHD were selected using the opportunity sampling method. A total of 42 participants between the age of 18-35 volunteered and were recruited for the study through the university disability service (11%), posters (16%) and through word of mouth (73%). Data of two participants were removed as the eye tracker repeatedly lost the pupil during recording. All participants were rewarded with an equal chance to win one of 6 £25 vouchers. Thirty-one of the 42 participants were healthy younger adult controls. Of the healthy control participants 15 (7 females; Mage = 24.33; SDage=4.32) participated as healthy controls, and the remaining 16 (9 females; Mage = 24.25; SDage=1.88) as healthy feigners. Seven ADHD participants (6 females) with a mean age 22.71 (SD=2.22) completed the study. The severity of the ADHD symptoms was analysed using the Adult ADHD self-report scale (for more demographic details see Table 1). The exclusion criteria include participants: 1) with any visual (other than corrected-to-normal vision) impairment 2) with any cognitive impairment 3) with additional diagnosis of neurological conditions 4) without a proper clinical diagnosis of ADHD. The exclusion criteria were applied because these impairments may interfere with the participants performance in the task.  \r\nPrior to data analysis, one of the participants was removed from ADHD group due to the lack of proper clinical diagnosis. Furthermore, a control participant was excluded with the assumption of having a probable mild cognitive impairment because the individual scored less than 82 (cut-off) in the Addenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination-III (ACE-III) \r\nStimuli and Apparatus \r\nAddenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination-III (ACE-III) \r\nThe ACE-III, developed by Hodges et.al, is an extended cognitive screening technique. The items of the test produce 5 sub-scores totalling 100, with each sub-score corresponding to a different cognitive domain, such as attention (18 points), memory (26 points), verbal fluency (14 points), language (26 points), and visuospatial skills (16 points) (Noone, 2015). Higher scores indicate superior cognitive functioning within the given domain. The validated cut-off point for normal cognitive functioning is 82/100, therefore individuals who yield a total score of < 82 are assumed to have probable mild cognitive impairment. The ACE-III has proven reliability (α= 0.88), sensitivity (0.93), specificity (1.0) and concurrent validity with alternative cognitive assessments such as the ACE-R (r= 0.99, p < 0.01; Hsieh, 2013).  \r\nIshihara Colour blindness test \r\nIshihara colour blindness developed by Dr Shinobu Ishihara, was used to assess the colour vision deficiency of congenital origin, particularly red-green deficiency (Ishihara, 2011). It consists of 24 coloured plates containing a circle of dots with random colours and numbers. Each plate includes primary and secondary colour dots, with the primary colours appearing in patterns or numbers, while secondary colours appear as the background (Shaygannejad et.al., 2012). Plates 1–15 were utilised because of the fact that the main goal was to separate the colour defects from the normal colour appreciation simply. The participants were instructed to read out the numbers aloud, without more than three seconds' delay. A participant with an error in reading the numbers of two or more plates were considered to be having an impaired colour vision. \r\nRoyal Air Force (RAF) ruler \r\nThe RAF near point rule is a 50cm long square rule with a cheek rest and slider holding a revolving four-sided cube. One of the 4 sides has a vertical line with a central dot for convergence fixation. It is used for determining the near point of convergence (NPC) (Sharma, 2017). The participant is instructed to keep a direct gaze on the dot while the slider descends and to report when the dot's image breaks into two. The cut-off point for NPC break and NPC recovery is between 5 and 7 cm respectively (Pang et.al., 2010) \r\nAdult ADHD Self Report Scale (ASRS-v1.1; Kessler et al., 2005) \r\nThe severity of ADHD symptoms presented by individuals with ADHD was assessed using the ASRS. The ASRS is an 18-item checklist, developed by the World Health Organization (WHO) work group together with the WHO World Mental Health (WMH) Survey Initiative (Kessler et al., 2005), to screen ADHD in adult patients. Completion of the ASRS requires participants to indicate how much they agree that the given statement relates to their behaviour over the past 6 months. The questions are divided into 2 parts: part A and part B. Part A contains 6 questions that are indicative of symptoms consistent with ADHD and are used for screening purposes. A score of 4 or above denotes symptoms typical with ADHD. The final 12 questions in Part B provide a more detailed breakdown of the specific symptoms an individual is presenting. The scale has high concurrent validity, and the internal consistency of the scale Cronbach’s α was found to be 0.88 (Adler et.al., 2006).\r\nHospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) \r\nHospital Anxiety and Depression Scale was developed by Zigmond and Snaith in 1983. It is a 14-item measure, used to detect the psychological distress of the participants (Zigmond & Snaith, 1983). Seven of the items measure anxiety (HADS-A), while the remaining seven measures the depressive symptoms (HADS-D). For each item, the participant is asked to indicate on a four-point scale the degree to which they feel a given statement relates to how they were feeling for the past week. The overall score for both anxiety and depression is 21. A score of 0-7 represents “normal”, 8-10 indicates “mild”, 11-14 “moderate and 15-21 indicates “severe” (Pais-Ribeiro et al., 2018). The scale is reliable and valid in measuring symptoms in both general and psychiatric patients (Bjelland et.al., 2002).  \r\n\r\nEye-Tracking Measurement \r\nParticipants eye movements were recorded via the EyeLink Desktop 1000 at 500Hz. To minimize the head movements, a chin rest was used. Participants were seated approximately 55cm from the computer monitor (monitor run at 60 Hz). All the stimuli used for the study were created and controlled using Experiment Builder Software Version 1.10.1630. Two different computers are used for the eye-tracking system: a host PC which tracks the eye movements and determines their actual gaze positions and a display computer which shows the stimuli during the calibration and experimental trial.  \r\nCalibration  \r\nPrior to presenting the experimental stimuli participants completed a 4-point calibration to ensure the eye tracker was accurately tracking their eyes. During this trial, the participant will be asked to follow a red dot that will move to the four edges of a +.  \r\nProsaccade task \r\nParticipants were asked to complete 16 gap trials as quickly and accurately as possible. At first the participants were instructed to look at a fixation point to centre their gaze. It was a white target displayed at the centre of the screen for 1000ms. Then they were told to focus on the appearing the red lateralised target, presented randomly to the left or right of the screen at 4° (visual angle) for 1200ms. The temporal gap in stimuli presentation is due to a 200ms blank interval screen which was displayed between the fading of the white fixation stimuli and the initial appearance of the red target.  \r\nAnti-saccade task \r\nFor anti-saccade task, the participants completed 24 gap trials with 4 practice trials. They were asked to look at the central white fixation presented for 1000ms before shifting their gaze and attentional focus to the opposite side of the screen from where the green target appeared. The green lateralised target was displayed randomly to the left or right side of the screen at 4° (visual angle) for 2000ms. There was a 200ms blank interval screen as a gap in between the fixation point and the target. \r\n Procedure \r\nThe study was approved by the Lancaster University Psychology Department Ethics Committee. Prior to study commencement healthy younger adult volunteers were randomly to either the healthy control or healthy feigner (asked to feign ADHD) group. All individuals with a formal clinical diagnosis of ADHD were assigned to the ADHD group. \r\nThe participants were required to visit the lab in order to participate. Before commencing the study, the participants provided informed consent. After taking the required demographic data, participants were then screened for the probable presence of mild cognitive impairment using the ACE-III. They were also screened for any visual impairments using the RAF rule and Ishihara colour blindness test. Then, the participants were asked to complete the HADS, to screen for any psychological distress. Additionally, the ADHD participants were asked to complete the ASRS questionnaire, to determine the severity of the disorder. \r\n On completion of the pre-study questionnaires, participants will be provided with Task information leaflet.  \r\nAt this time control and ADHD participants were presented with a vignette (Appendix B) detailing an individual trying to feign ADHD. Comparatively, those assigned to the feigning condition were presented with a vignette (Appendix C) that explained the symptoms of ADHD and were asked to imagine themselves in a situation where they were to feign ADHD. All participants were then asked to complete the two eye movement tasks and the associated calibration trials. Fundamentally, at this time healthy controls and those with ADHD were asked to complete the tasks honestly to the best of their ability. In comparison, those in the feigning condition were asked to complete these tasks whilst pretending to have ADHD (without any over-exaggeration). On completion of the tasks, all participants were informed that they will be entered into a lottery to win a £25 and were provided with a debrief sheet (Appendix H), which explains the details of the study.  \r\nData Analysis \r\nDataViewer Software Version 3.2 was used to extract and analyse the raw EyeLink data. The data was then analysed online using a bespoke software SaccadeMachine. With the software spikes and noise were removed by filtering out frames with a velocity signal greater than 1,500 deg/s or with an acceleration signal greater than 100,000 deg 2 /sec. Fixations and saccadic events were identified using the EyeLink Parser, and the saccades were extracted alongside multiple temporal and spatial variables. Trials were eliminated when the participant did not direct their gaze on to the central fixation. The temporal window of 80-700ms used and measured from the onset of the target display. Anticipatory saccades made prior to 80ms, and excessively delayed saccades made after 700ms were removed. The data thus formed consists of the latency and error rate. Latency is the time taken of the correct trial whereas the error rate is the percentage of trials the participant got wrong. Data of one individual participant from the control group was removed as their ACE score was low suggesting the probable presence of mild cognitive impairment. Due to the lack of a formal diagnosis, data of an ADHD participant was removed.  \r\nAll data was then assessed to ensure it met the assumptions required for statistical analysis. First, all data was assessed for the presence of any outliers (+/- 2SD). This analysis revealed there were 3 outliers for the both the pro- and anti-saccade measures. Given that these outliers may skew the subsequent analysis, all outliers were removed. The subsequent data was then checked to ensure it met the assumptions of normality. It was found that the prosaccade latency satisfied the normality condition (see Figure 1), hence one-way ANOVA was applied to investigate the difference in latency across the groups. As the data for prosaccade error rate was skewed (see Figure 2), Kruskal-Wallis H Test was used to determine the difference in data across the groups. Removing the outliers gave a data which satisfied normality condition for both anti-saccade latency (see Figure 3) and error rate (see Figure 4). Hence one-way ANOVA was used to test the difference for both the data across the groups and a post hoc Tukey’s Honest Significant Difference test was used to determine the significance of the difference in anti-saccade latency. \r\n\r\n"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"45"},["name","Publisher"],["description","An entity responsible for making the resource available"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3121"},["text","Lancaster University"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"42"},["name","Format"],["description","The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3122"},["text","SPSS.sav for results\r\nWord.doc for demographic and data acquistion form\r\nPDF for consent form"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"43"},["name","Identifier"],["description","An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3123"},["text","George_2022"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"37"},["name","Contributor"],["description","An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3124"},["text","Lettie and Delyth"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"46"},["name","Relation"],["description","A related resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3125"},["text","None"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"44"},["name","Language"],["description","A language of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3126"},["text","English"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"51"},["name","Type"],["description","The nature or genre of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3127"},["text","Data and Text"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"38"},["name","Coverage"],["description","The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3128"},["text","LA1 4YF"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"47"},["name","Rights"],["description","Information about rights held in and over the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3134"},["text","Open"]]]]]],["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"4"},["name","LUSTRE"],["description","Adds LUSTRE specific project information"],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"52"},["name","Supervisor"],["description","Name of the project supervisor"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3195"},["text","Dr Megan Rose Readman"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"53"},["name","Project Level"],["description","Project levels should be entered as UG or MSC"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3196"},["text","MSc"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"54"},["name","Topic"],["description","Should contain the sub-category of Psychology the project falls under"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3197"},["text","Clinical\r\n\r\nCognitive, Perception"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"56"},["name","Sample Size"],["description"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3198"},["text","38"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"55"},["name","Statistical Analysis Type"],["description","The type of statistical analysis used in the project"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3199"},["text","ANOVA"]]]]]]]],["item",{"itemId":"80","public":"1","featured":"0"},["fileContainer",["file",{"fileId":"38"},["src","https://johnntowse.com/LUSTRE/files/original/cdeccb8763d386dc1f1f9f5c6d7e1f84.pdf"],["authentication","82841499e425774f7414de8d9c851ef6"]]],["collection",{"collectionId":"4"},["elementSetContainer",["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"1"},["name","Dublin Core"],["description","The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/."],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"50"},["name","Title"],["description","A name given to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"183"},["text","Focus group"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"41"},["name","Description"],["description","An account of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"184"},["text","Primarily qualitative analysis based on forming focus groups to collect opinions and attitudes on a topic of interest"]]]]]]]],["elementSetContainer",["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"1"},["name","Dublin Core"],["description","The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/."],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"50"},["name","Title"],["description","A name given to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1853"},["text","An exploration of how young adults engage with charities"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"39"},["name","Creator"],["description","An entity primarily responsible for making the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1854"},["text","Saday Lakhani"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"40"},["name","Date"],["description","A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1855"},["text","2018"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"41"},["name","Description"],["description","An account of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1856"},["text","Research exploring how individuals choose to engage with charities has been limited to studies and interpretations from the 20th Century. In addition to this, research into how young adults choose to interact with charities has not been explored frequently. The present study aims to tackle both of these issues by exploring how young adults choose to interact with charities. Using Sargeant’s (1990) donor decision model as a base, this investigation explores what motivates and deters potential donors from engaging with charity and exploring how they choose to engage. It was found that income was a major barrier towards donation and that the role of others was an important motivator. Lastly participants registered that social media is a prevalent part of how people choose to interact with charities, however donation and volunteering are more valued. "]]]],["element",{"elementId":"49"},["name","Subject"],["description","The topic of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1857"},["text","None"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"48"},["name","Source"],["description","A related resource from which the described resource is derived"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1858"},["text","Participants \r\nThis investigation consisted of 15 participants based in Lancaster between the ages of 19-25 years, all of which studied at Lancaster University. The sample consisted of eight male participants with an age range of 19-25 and seven female participants with an age range of 19-22. Participants were recruited via opportunistic methods on social media. Advertisement for participation was published on various social media platforms relevant to the University. Each recruited participant was asked to invite a friend to their focus group discussion. Participants were provided with refreshments as an incentive for participation. Due to the method of online recruitment, it was assumed that all of the participants were frequent users of social media and therefore understood its utility. Participants were not filtered for their donation history as it was assumed that individuals would have donated at some point in the past. \r\nProcedure \r\nEach focus group consisted of up to four participants which, as a result of the recruitment method, ensured that each group would be consist of two pairs who were not familiar with each other. The intention of this conflicting paired discussion was to encourage \r\na more open and honest discussion. As well as this, the design of having a paired discussion ensures that statements made by an individual can be verified or rejected by the paired member as they are familiar with the activities of the speaker. As such, the paired member can act as a moderator for the contributions. The focus groups were segmented by gender. One group consisted of all male participants, another consisted of all female participants. The remaining two groups were mixed gender groups. The purpose behind this segmentation was to explore if there was a difference in responses between male and female participants. \r\nThe focus group discussions took place in a quiet and comfortable room within Lancaster University to encourage a free-flowing discussion without interruption. Upon arrival, each participant was provided with a participant information sheet to read, and a consent form to complete outlining the nature of the study and the confidentiality of the data recorded. After any questions were addressed the discussions began and were audio recorded. \r\nThe topics for discussion centred on the areas of exploration mentioned above. The discussion was structured (see Appendix C for Discussion Guide) but was open allowing the discussion to migrate to a number of areas that were pertinent to the participants. The researcher terminated the discussion upon satisfaction that participants had nothing further to add. Participants were then provided with debrief sheets outlining the purpose of the study and its aims. \r\nEach focus group discussion was transcribed onto a word document and subsequently added to NVivo 12 for qualitative analysis. \r\nAnalysis \r\nThe transcripts from each group were exported for analysis to NVivo 12 qualitative analysis software (QSR International Pty Ltd. Version 12, 2018). These were then analysed using the framework for thematic analysis derived from Braun and Clarke (2006). Transcripts \r\nwere read multiple times to ensure familiarity with the content of the discussions. Areas of the discussion that were deemed interesting were subsequently coded within the software according to both the semantic and latent quality. These codes were informed by pre-existing psychological literature in addition to code generation in vivo. This data was then organised into several themes from which conclusions could be generated. These themes were re- analysed to ensure that they were an accurate and valid representation of the content of the discussions. The final themes were then solidified. \r\n"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"45"},["name","Publisher"],["description","An entity responsible for making the resource available"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1859"},["text","Lancaster University"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"42"},["name","Format"],["description","The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1860"},["text","Text/Word.docx"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"43"},["name","Identifier"],["description","An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1861"},["text","Lakhani2018"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"37"},["name","Contributor"],["description","An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1862"},["text","Rebecca James"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"47"},["name","Rights"],["description","Information about rights held in and over the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1863"},["text","Open"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"46"},["name","Relation"],["description","A related resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1864"},["text","None"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"44"},["name","Language"],["description","A language of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1865"},["text","English"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"51"},["name","Type"],["description","The nature or genre of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1866"},["text","Text"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"38"},["name","Coverage"],["description","The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1867"},["text","LA1 4YF"]]]]]],["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"4"},["name","LUSTRE"],["description","Adds LUSTRE specific project information"],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"52"},["name","Supervisor"],["description","Name of the project supervisor"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1868"},["text","Leslie Hallam"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"53"},["name","Project Level"],["description","Project levels should be entered as UG or MSC"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1869"},["text","MSc"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"54"},["name","Topic"],["description","Should contain the sub-category of Psychology the project falls under"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1870"},["text","Marketing, Social"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"56"},["name","Sample Size"],["description"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1871"},["text","15 participants"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"55"},["name","Statistical Analysis Type"],["description","The type of statistical analysis used in the project"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1872"},["text","Qualitative (Thematic Analysis)"]]]]]]]],["item",{"itemId":"81","public":"1","featured":"0"},["fileContainer",["file",{"fileId":"39"},["src","https://johnntowse.com/LUSTRE/files/original/4dd9543e110a7e4ce23d67ad7dc07aff.pdf"],["authentication","40c67288eea36432d7427dbc94d64dac"]]],["collection",{"collectionId":"5"},["elementSetContainer",["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"1"},["name","Dublin Core"],["description","The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/."],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"50"},["name","Title"],["description","A name given to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"185"},["text","Questionnaire-based study"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"41"},["name","Description"],["description","An account of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"186"},["text","An analysis of self-report data from the administration of questionnaires(s)"]]]]]]]],["elementSetContainer",["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"1"},["name","Dublin Core"],["description","The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/."],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"50"},["name","Title"],["description","A name given to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1873"},["text","A Match Made in Heaven? The Effect of Congruency Between Accent and Promoted\r\nProduct in Radio Adverts"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"39"},["name","Creator"],["description","An entity primarily responsible for making the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1874"},["text","Samantha Trow"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"40"},["name","Date"],["description","A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1875"},["text","2018"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"41"},["name","Description"],["description","An account of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1876"},["text","Research consistently shows that accents are powerful social cues used in our\r\neveryday interactions as well as in advertisements; they can change how we perceive\r\nothers and potentially also associated products or brands. Recent studies have\r\nexplored the effect of congruency between the accent of the speaker in adverts and the\r\ncountry-of-origin of the advertised products. Yet the findings from research on the\r\ncongruency effect is mixed and sparse. Therefore, this study investigated further into\r\nthe effect of congruency. Participants were randomly assigned to one of four\r\nexperimental conditions. The study employed a 2 (Accent: Northern English vs.\r\nItalian) x 2 (Product: fish and chips vs. pizza) between participant design. In doing\r\nthis, two adverts had a congruent accent-product pair (e.g., Northern English speaker\r\nadvertising a fish and chips brand) and two ads were accent-product incongruent (e.g.,\r\nNorthern English speaker advertising a pizza brand). After listening to the ads,\r\nparticipants then completed a questionnaire which measured participants’ brand\r\nmemory, attention to the ad, purchase intentions, perceived similarity to the speaker \r\nand evaluations of the brand, advert and speaker. The results showed no congruency\r\neffect, however other striking findings were revealed that will be discussed in this\r\npaper. "]]]],["element",{"elementId":"49"},["name","Subject"],["description","The topic of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1877"},["text","None"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"48"},["name","Source"],["description","A related resource from which the described resource is derived"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1878"},["text","This study used a 2 (Accent: Northern English vs. Italian) x 2 (Product: fish and chips\r\nvs. pizza) between subject design. The dependant variables were participants’\r\nattention to the ad, memorability of the advertised brand name, purchase intentions,\r\nevaluations of the speaker, and attitude towards the ad and brand. Additionally, the\r\nevaluations of the speaker included their perceived warmth, competence, sociointellectual status, aesthetic qualities, and dynamism traits.\r\nParticipants\r\nThrough opportunity sampling, 82 participants were recruited. This sample\r\ncomprised of 29 males and 53 females. Participants were randomly assigned to one of\r\nthe four conditions. The participants’ age ranged from 19 to 65 (Mage = 25.5 years,\r\nSDage = 10.8). All but one participant were native speakers of English.\r\nMaterials\r\nRadio Advertisements. For this experiment, four radio adverts were created\r\n(see Appendix A). Two ads were accent-product congruent (Italian accent and pizza,\r\nNorthern English accent and fish and chips) and two ads were accent-product\r\nincongruent (Italian accent and fish and chips, Northern English accent and pizza). In\r\norder to create the adverts, two male speakers were recruited. One of the speakers\r\nspoke with an authentic Northern English accent and one of the speakers spoke with\r\nan authentic Italian accent, both spoke at similar paces with no major differences in\r\ntheir tone of voice.\r\nQuestionnaire. The questionnaire used in the experiment was created via the\r\nsurvey software, Qualtrics. The questionnaire took approximately 10 minutes to\r\ncomplete. The items and scales used to measure the dependent variables are discussed\r\nbelow.\r\nBrand attitude. Participants’ attitude towards the advertised brand was\r\nmeasured using a 4-item, 7-point bipolar scale used in Liu, Wen, Wei. and Zhao’s\r\n(2013) study (ɑ = .92). See Appendix B for the full subscale.\r\nAd attitude. Participants’ attitude towards the advert subscale was taken from\r\nLalwani, Lwin, and Li’s (2005) study. The participants were asked to rate the radio\r\nadvert using 4-items with 7-point bipolar scales (ɑ = .87). See Appendix C.\r\nAttention to the ad. Also taken from Lalwani et al.’s (2005) study, were 3-\r\nitems with 7-point likert scales to measure participants’ attention to the ad (ɑ = .24).\r\nThe Cronbach’s alpha score was low however removing items did not increase the\r\nalpha significantly to represent a robust measure. See Appendix D.\r\nPurchase intentions. In addition, based on the scales used in Hornikx, van\r\nMeurs, and Hof’s (2013) research, the questionnaire included 3-items with 7-point\r\nbipolar scales to measure participants’ purchase intentions (ɑ = .88). See Appendix E.\r\nCompetence and warmth. The questionnaire included questions which\r\nmeasured the perceived competence and warmth of the speaker. The 9-items for\r\ncompetence (ɑ = .90) and 9-items for warmth (ɑ = .92) were presented together. The\r\nscale used for the items were 7-point likert scales (1= Strongly Disagree, 7= Strongly\r\nAgree), taken from Rudman and Glick’s (1999) study. The list of items used can be\r\nfound in Appendix F and G, respectively.\r\nSocio-intellectual status, aestheticism and dynamism. Also, the questionnaire\r\nincluded the Speech Dialect Attitudinal Scale by Mulac (1975, 1976). This consisted \r\nof 12-items (four items for each subscale) with 7-point bipolar scales measuring the\r\nparticipants’ perceived socio-intellectual status (ɑ = .85), aestheticism (ɑ = .85), and\r\ndynamism of the speaker (ɑ = .76). See Appendix H.\r\nSimilarity. To measure participants’ perceived similarity to the speaker in the\r\nad, the questionnaire included 3-items with 7-point likert scales (ɑ = .80) taken from\r\nLalwani et al.’s (2005) questionnaire. See Appendix I.\r\nManipulation check. The questionnaire examined if participants correctly\r\nidentified the accent used by the speaker in the ad. Participants were asked “What was\r\nthe accent of the speaker in the ad?”.\r\nMemorability of the brand name. At the end of the questionnaire the\r\nparticipants were asked the open-ended question “Please write down the product’s\r\nbrand name that was advertised in the radio ad you listened to.”.\r\nAdditional questions. The questionnaire included additional questions which\r\ninvestigated whether any factor other than accent affected participants’ responses.\r\nThese questions consisted of 7-point bipolar scales, 7-point likert scales, unipolar\r\nscales, and open-ended questions (see Appendix J). The questions measured the\r\ncomprehensibility of the speaker in the ad, participants’ attitudes towards the accent,\r\naccent of the participant, likability of the advertised products, hunger, and native\r\nlanguage of the participant. The questionnaire also asked demographic questions.\r\nProcedure\r\nAfter giving the informed consent, participants were randomly assigned to an\r\nexperimental condition and sent the link to the Qualtrics questionnaire. At the\r\nbeginning of the questionnaire the radio ad was played followed by the questions. The\r\norder in which the items were presented were brand attitude, ad attitude, attention to\r\nad, purchase intentions, warmth, and competence, socio-intellectual status of speaker, \r\naestheticism of speaker, dynamism of speaker, similarity to speaker,\r\ncomprehensibility of speaker, accent of the speaker, attitude towards the ad, accent of\r\nthe participant, likeability of the advertised product, frequency of eating advertised\r\nproduct, hunger of participant, participants’ first language, brand name memorability,\r\nand finally followed by the demographic questions. On completion of the\r\nquestionnaire, participants were thanked and debriefed.\r\nAnalysis\r\nA multivariate ANOVA was used to test the main and interaction effects of\r\naccent and product on participants’ evaluations. Also, separate univariate ANOVAs\r\nwere conducted to explore if there were any covariate effects on participants attention\r\nto the ad, brand memorability, evaluations of brand, ad or speaker. The covariate\r\nvariables were participants’ perceived similarity to the speaker, comprehensibility of\r\nthe speaker, participants’ attitude towards the speaker’s accent, hunger, frequency of,\r\nand likability of eating the advertised product. "]]]],["element",{"elementId":"45"},["name","Publisher"],["description","An entity responsible for making the resource available"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1879"},["text","Lancaster University"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"42"},["name","Format"],["description","The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1880"},["text","Data/SPSS.sav"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"43"},["name","Identifier"],["description","An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1881"},["text","Trow2018"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"37"},["name","Contributor"],["description","An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1882"},["text","Rebecca James"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"47"},["name","Rights"],["description","Information about rights held in and over the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1883"},["text","Open"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"46"},["name","Relation"],["description","A related resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1884"},["text","None"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"44"},["name","Language"],["description","A language of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1885"},["text","English"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"51"},["name","Type"],["description","The nature or genre of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1886"},["text","Data"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"38"},["name","Coverage"],["description","The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1887"},["text","LA1 4YF"]]]]]],["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"4"},["name","LUSTRE"],["description","Adds LUSTRE specific project information"],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"52"},["name","Supervisor"],["description","Name of the project supervisor"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1888"},["text","Dr Tamara Rakić"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"53"},["name","Project Level"],["description","Project levels should be entered as UG or MSC"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1889"},["text","MSc"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"54"},["name","Topic"],["description","Should contain the sub-category of Psychology the project falls under"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1890"},["text","Advertising, Marketing, Cognitive Perception"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"56"},["name","Sample Size"],["description"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1891"},["text","82 participants"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"55"},["name","Statistical Analysis Type"],["description","The type of statistical analysis used in the project"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1892"},["text","MANOVA, ANOVA"]]]]]]]],["item",{"itemId":"85","public":"1","featured":"0"},["fileContainer",["file",{"fileId":"43"},["src","https://johnntowse.com/LUSTRE/files/original/fd8beba4d36cf77f159a4790ff0ed220.pdf"],["authentication","b212f6caefe48528fc1d7661f8ab8278"]],["file",{"fileId":"87"},["src","https://johnntowse.com/LUSTRE/files/original/fe8a70579aa21f555d3941edb7ad0146.csv"],["authentication","2816070da63c5db57305fb3aedcf7cae"]],["file",{"fileId":"88"},["src","https://johnntowse.com/LUSTRE/files/original/fecb178b57c68a834ab4ddb2bf3da9af.pdf"],["authentication","835d6a6191486c38d5fddc010858179a"]]],["collection",{"collectionId":"5"},["elementSetContainer",["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"1"},["name","Dublin Core"],["description","The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/."],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"50"},["name","Title"],["description","A name given to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"185"},["text","Questionnaire-based study"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"41"},["name","Description"],["description","An account of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"186"},["text","An analysis of self-report data from the administration of questionnaires(s)"]]]]]]]],["elementSetContainer",["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"1"},["name","Dublin Core"],["description","The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/."],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"50"},["name","Title"],["description","A name given to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1953"},["text","Influence of an autobiographical memory recollection on moral decision making.\r\n"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"39"},["name","Creator"],["description","An entity primarily responsible for making the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1954"},["text","Sandra Andrasiunaite\r\n"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"40"},["name","Date"],["description","A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1955"},["text","2018"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"41"},["name","Description"],["description","An account of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1956"},["text","Research shows that emotional states are involved in moral reasoning and may affect\r\npeople’s decision-making processes (Achar, So, Agrawal, & Duhachek, 2016).\r\nHowever, in recent research emotional states were shown to be easily influenced by\r\nsuch factors as the language type. It was found that a stimulus presented in the native\r\nlanguage was perceived more emotionally when compared to stimuli presented in the\r\nsecond language (Pavlenko, 2005). This difference in emotionality was called the\r\nlanguage effect (Puntoni, S., Langhe, & Van Osselaer, 2009). The relationship\r\nbetween used language (native vs. second) and emotionality level is important as it\r\nmay provide potential applications in promoting beneficial decision making and\r\nconsequent behaviour. Many advertising campaigns already target emotions (i.e.\r\nempathy, guilt, regret) in order to persuade people to act by their request (Lee,\r\nAndrade, Palmer, 2013). Thus the focus of this research was to analyse the\r\nrelationship between emotional language processing (native vs. second language)\r\ntargeting guilt, empathy levels and how they influence the consequent behaviour (i.e.\r\nhelping). A multicultural sample of 126 bilingual adults, who all speak English, as a\r\nsecond language, completed an online questionnaire, assessing self-reported guilt,\r\npro-social behaviour inclination, empathy and pro-social behaviour. Results showed\r\nthat no significant differences were found between two language groups, indicating\r\nthe lack of language effect in the present sample. Also, the results showed that high\r\nlevels of self-reported guilt were significantly and positively associated with high\r\nlevels of pro-social inclination and pro-social behaviour. Empathy was shown to have\r\nthe same association – high levels of empathy being associated with high levels of\r\npro-social inclination and pro-social behaviour. Lastly, further analysis found selfreported guilt as a predictor of pro-social behaviour and pro-social behaviour\r\ninclination. Overall, this study contradicted the previous research on the language\r\neffect, but at the same time, it supported the relationship between guilt and pro-social behaviour. Based on current findings and consideration of potential limitations, future\r\nresearch could examine the emotional language processing and its’ influence on\r\nbehaviour by targeting specific two languages and presenting text adverts as an\r\nemotional stimulus in order to control more variables and to increase applicability."]]]],["element",{"elementId":"49"},["name","Subject"],["description","The topic of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1957"},["text","The language effect\r\nemotional decision making\r\n guilt\r\nempathy\r\n pro-social behaviour"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"48"},["name","Source"],["description","A related resource from which the described resource is derived"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1958"},["text","Participants\r\nParticipants of this study were adults, who spoke English as a second language (N=\r\n126, 58 males, 68 females) and ranged in age from 18 to 46. Originally there were\r\n138 participants, but 12 were excluded from further analysis due to being the native\r\nspeakers of the English language and therefore not fitting the core requirement –\r\nspeaking English as a second language. Also 10 participants wrote the memory in\r\nEnglish instead of their native language, so they were diverted to the second language\r\ncondition before proceeding with the analysis. The whole sample of participants was\r\nvery diverse, which consisted of 25 different nationalities and 24 different native\r\nlanguages (see Appendix D), the top four languages being - Lithuanian (40), Spanish\r\n(14), German (13) and Polish (13). All participants signed an online consent form and\r\nanswered questions about their nationality, native language, country of residence, and\r\nEnglish language proficiency before proceeding with the questionnaire.\r\nMaterials\r\nSelf-reported guilt\r\nSelf-reported guilt was measured by asking participants to first – recall and describe a\r\nmemory in either their native or second language (i.e. English) and then to evaluate\r\nhow bad they feel about their recalled actions, how guilty they feel about those\r\nactions and how much they regret them (Nelissen, 2012). All of the three questions\r\ntesting self-reported guilt were assessed by 6-point forced choice Likert scale from 1\r\n(‘Very much’) to 6 (‘Not at all’). Before the start of analyses, the scale was reverse\r\nscored from 1 (‘Not at all’) to 6 (‘Very much’) to ensure consistency with other\r\nmeasures.\r\nPro-social behaviour\r\nThe pro-social behaviour was measured by asking participants, how many additional\r\nquestions they would be willing to answer after completing the survey. Participants\r\nwere informed that they are almost done with the survey. However, it was stated, that\r\nit would be a great help to the researchers if participants could answer some\r\nadditional questions from a different survey. Participants were provided with a choice\r\nto answer from zero to 10 questions, after completing the original survey.\r\nConsequently, willingness to answer the higher number of questions was perceived as\r\nan indication of higher pro-social behaviour.\r\nPro-social behaviour inclinations\r\nPro-social behaviour inclination was measured using a set of five moral dilemmas\r\nfrom the research done by Zhang, Chen, Jiang, Xu, Wang, and Zhao (2017). This measure tested how much a person is inclined to display helping behaviour. The\r\nanswers to these moral dilemmas were assessed by a forced choice Likert scale from\r\n1 (‘Strongly disagree’) to 6 (‘Strongly agree’), which was changed from the original\r\n7-point Likert scale to ensure consistency with the measures of the present study.\r\nAlso, some moral dilemmas were adapted by changing mentioned currency from yens\r\nto pounds in order to make dilemmas more relatable for mostly UK based\r\nparticipants. A sample of the item measuring pro-social behaviour inclination is:\r\n‘Your school’s foundation is raising money for children from poor areas. The money\r\nwill be used to buy textbooks and writing materials for the children. You have 100\r\npounds to spare. Are you willing to donate the money to the student?’\r\nEmpathy\r\nEmpathy was assessed by using The Short 3 Factor Version of Empathy Quotient\r\n(Muncer & Ling, 2006). The empathy measure consisted of 15 items, with a choice of\r\nanswers assessed by a forced choice 6 point - Likert scale from 1 (‘Strongly\r\ndisagree’) to 6 (‘Strongly agree’). The original measure was provided with a 4 point\r\nLikert scale (1-strongly disagree, 2- disagree, 3- agree, 4- strongly agree), but it was\r\nchanged for the current research into 6 points Likert scale in order to ensure\r\nconsistency with other measures and provide a wider range of answers. Seven items\r\n(6, 7, 8, 9, 12, 13, 14) of this empathy measure were reverse scored before the start of\r\nanalysis to ensure its’ reliability and validity. A sample of the item measuring\r\nempathy is: ‘I am quick to spot when someone in a group is feeling awkward or\r\nuncomfortable.’\r\nProcedure\r\nThis study received the ethical approval from the Psychology Department Research\r\nEthics Committee of Lancaster University.\r\nThe hypotheses, method and analyses of the current study were preregistered before\r\nthe collection of participants has started. The whole information about the study will\r\nbe available on the Open Science Framework page.\r\nParticipants were recruited using social media platforms like Facebook and Instagram\r\nand in person, inviting people to complete the survey online. The survey was\r\ndistributed using an anonymous link, which directed to a Qualtrics page of the survey.\r\nParticipants were presented with an information sheet and the consent form and only\r\nafter signing it, they were allowed to proceed with the questionnaire. At first,\r\nparticipants were asked to provide some general information about themselves such as\r\nage, gender, nationality, English language proficiency and country of residence.\r\nParticipants were then randomly allocated to an experimental condition (native\r\nlanguage, second language). Then they were requested to recall a memory, when they\r\ncaused someone harm and felt bad about it. They were asked to recall and describe\r\nthis memory either in English or in their native language at random. Participants in\r\nthe native language condition were asked to recall the memory in their native\r\nlanguage. Participants in the second language condition were asked to recall the\r\nmemory in English. After providing the memory, participants were asked to evaluate\r\nhow bad, guilty and regretful they feel about their recalled actions. Afterwards, they\r\ncompleted the measure of pro-social behavior, by indicating how many additional\r\nquestions they would be willing to answer after the current survey ends. The last part\r\nof the survey consisted of five moral dilemmas assessing pro-social behaviour inclination (see Appendix A) and the measure of empathy (see Appendix B). Overall,\r\nthe survey took approximately 15 minutes to complete. At the end of the survey,\r\nparticipants were presented with a debrief sheet, explaining the aims and the\r\nimportance of this research (see Appendix C).\r\n "]]]],["element",{"elementId":"45"},["name","Publisher"],["description","An entity responsible for making the resource available"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1959"},["text","Lancaster University"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"42"},["name","Format"],["description","The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1960"},["text","Data"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"43"},["name","Identifier"],["description","An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1961"},["text","Andrasiunaite2018\r\n"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"37"},["name","Contributor"],["description","An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1962"},["text","Ellie Ball"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"47"},["name","Rights"],["description","Information about rights held in and over the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1963"},["text","Open"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"46"},["name","Relation"],["description","A related resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1964"},["text","None"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"44"},["name","Language"],["description","A language of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1965"},["text","English"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"51"},["name","Type"],["description","The nature or genre of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1966"},["text","Data"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"38"},["name","Coverage"],["description","The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1967"},["text","LA1 4YF"]]]]]],["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"4"},["name","LUSTRE"],["description","Adds LUSTRE specific project information"],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"52"},["name","Supervisor"],["description","Name of the project supervisor"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1968"},["text","Dr Neil McLatchie\r\n"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"53"},["name","Project Level"],["description","Project levels should be entered as UG or MSC"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1969"},["text","MSc"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"54"},["name","Topic"],["description","Should contain the sub-category of Psychology the project falls under"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1970"},["text","Social Psychology"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"56"},["name","Sample Size"],["description"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1971"},["text","126 Participants"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"55"},["name","Statistical Analysis Type"],["description","The type of statistical analysis used in the project"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1972"},["text","Correlations\r\nt-test\r\nANOVA\r\nmultiple regression"]]]]]]]],["item",{"itemId":"33","public":"1","featured":"0"},["collection",{"collectionId":"9"},["elementSetContainer",["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"1"},["name","Dublin Core"],["description","The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/."],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"50"},["name","Title"],["description","A name given to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"499"},["text","Behavioural observations"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"41"},["name","Description"],["description","An account of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"500"},["text","Project focusing on observation of behaviours.\r\nIncludes infant habituation studies"]]]]]]]],["elementSetContainer",["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"1"},["name","Dublin Core"],["description","The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/."],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"50"},["name","Title"],["description","A name given to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1062"},["text","The use of iPad technology in comparison to picture books as an aid to symbolic understanding of word – picture-object relations in typically developing preschool children, with iconicity as a mediating factor."]]]],["element",{"elementId":"39"},["name","Creator"],["description","An entity primarily responsible for making the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1063"},["text","Sarah English"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"40"},["name","Date"],["description","A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1064"},["text","2014"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"41"},["name","Description"],["description","An account of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1065"},["text","This study investigated how the Apple iPad in comparison to a traditional picture book may facilitate symbolic understanding of word –picture-object relations in both preschool children and children with Autism Spectrum Disorder. In addition the iconicity of the pictures presented was manipulated, with both highly iconic colour photographs and line drawings presented to children within a word learning sequence on the Apple iPad and within a picture book. Children were repeatedly taught a novel label paired with a novel image and in a series of tasks which followed, asked to both map this novel label to a previously unseen 3 dimensional target object and to generalise this label to a novel exemplar of the target object. It was found that the majority of typically developing children were able to respond symbolically across the conditions, that is select the target object at the mapping stage and novel object at the generalisation stage. However, iconicity was found to be a mediating factor within the picture book modality, with more children responding symbolically within the Colour Book condition than in the Line Book condition. Robust symbolic responses in both the iPad conditions were at a level comparable with the Line Book condition. Therefore, the picture book appears to be of more benefit in terms of facilitating symbolic understanding of pictures in typically developing preschool children than the Apple iPad. Implications of these findings are considered with regards to the educational use of the iPad within preschool settings."]]]],["element",{"elementId":"49"},["name","Subject"],["description","The topic of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1066"},["text","word mapping\r\niconicity\r\ntechnology"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"48"},["name","Source"],["description","A related resource from which the described resource is derived"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1067"},["text","Picture book. The picture book stimuli were pictures of both familiar and unfamiliar objects presented within a picture book format, each presented singularly on a separate page, opposite a blank page.  Pictures were either colour photographs or line drawings of objects. Colour photographs were high resolution images 15cm by 20cm in size. Line drawings were the same size and created by using an application on the iPad called ‘Camera FX’ which transformed the colour photographs into line drawings (Appendix B). Within each book, there were eight pictures of two unfamiliar objects (Appendix C and D) and there were five pictures of familiar objects (Appendix E) and. Each unfamiliar object was depicted four times.  The test pictures used in the word learning task were presented within each book at the end of the sequence of pictures described (Appendix F). The test pictures were presented together on opposite pages and were smaller in size (15cm by 10 cm). There were four picture books created each containing different stimuli; two containing colour images and two containing line drawings.\r\n\r\nIPad. For each of the iPad conditions, an Apple iPad 2 covered by a protective case was used. Using an application called “SeeTouchLearn” on the iPad, four lessons were created (Appendix G). This application was chosen in order to replicate the picture sequences presented within the book format. Each lesson was identical to the picture book sequences in that it used the same images presented singularly in the same order of both familiar and unfamiliar objects. The pictures presented were 15cm by 11cm. The word learning task, as in the picture book stimuli was presented at the end of the training sequence. This consisted of pictures of both the unfamiliar objects presented side by side, 9cm by 7cm in size. Using the iPad’ built in microphone audio stimuli was integrated into the lesson. This was different from the book conditions in which images were named or highlighted by the researcher.\r\n\r\nTasks. The stimuli for the subsequent tasks consisted of four laminated pictures of the target objects (either colour or line drawing dependent upon the condition), 18cm by 13cm in size and sixteen 3 dimensional objects.  Of these 3 dimensional objects, four were the target objects that had been depicted in the training picture sequences, four were previously unseen familiar objects (cup, horse, book, phone), four were the distractor objects that had been depicted in the picture sequences and four were novel exemplars of the target objects (different colour). For each condition different stimuli were used in the tasks that followed the training sequence and word learning task. These consisted of one target object, one familiar object, one distractor object and one novel object alongside the target picture for that condition.\r\nEach session for which additional consent had been obtained by parents was video and audio recorded using a video camera and tripod.\r\n\r\nProcedure\r\nParticipants were tested individually and took part in all four conditions within one session, counterbalanced for order. Two of the children shown signs of not wishing to continue at that time and so completed the remaining condition/s at a different time. Each participant was asked if they would like to “look at some pictures” with the researcher. Upon agreeing to this request, the child was shown to a quiet room within the setting where a small table was placed in the middle of the room with two chairs at right angles to one another. The camera and tripod was set up in the corner of the room to record those children for whom additional consent had been obtained. The participant was informed that they would were going to look at some pictures and if they still wished to take part then the testing session began. Each condition was presented to the child within the same session due to time constraints. If the child began to lose interest or appeared not to want to take part then the session was stopped immediately and the child went back into the setting to play. \r\n\r\nTraining stage. The child was shown a series of pictures within the picture book iPad consisting of five familiar items as well as two unfamiliar items (distractor/ target picture). The familiar items were named once (“look it’s a dog”). The unfamiliar target object was named twice (“look it’s a dax/ged/yat/wug. See the dax/ged/yat/wug!”). The unfamiliar distractor object was highlighted to the participant but not named (“Look at this!”). At the end of the series of pictures, the participant was presented with two pictures (target/distractor) within the book /application and asked to identify the target picture (“show me a Dax/Ged/Yat/Wug”) in order to confirm the child’s ability to map the novel label to the novel picture. If the child had successfully mapped the novel label to the target picture and pointed to the target picture then the researcher moved onto the subsequent tasks. If the child pointed to the distracter picture and therefore had not successfully mapped the novel label to the target picture, then the researcher highlighted the correct picture to the child (“actually this is dax/ged/yat/wug. Can you touch the dax/ged/yat/wug? Let’s play again”) and the sequence was repeated again until the child was successful in identifying the target picture. The number of training stage repetitions was recorded. The procedure was identical for the iPad conditions except that the labelling of the target and familiar objects and the question asked at the word learning task had been previously recorded onto the lessons within the application. \r\nMapping task. The child was presented with the target picture and the target object (3D object) and asked “show me a dax/ged/yat/wug.” The task sought to establish if the child was able to extend the novel label they had learned through the previous associative pairing of the picture and a novel label to a real world exemplar of the picture. If the child selected the target picture then this should be taken as indicative of associative learning. However, if the child selected either the target object alone or the picture and object then this would indicate a symbolic understanding of the word – picture – object relationship.\r\n\r\nPerservation Control Task. The child was presented with the target picture and a familiar object (book/horse/phone/cup) and asked to show the researcher the familiar object. The task sought to establish if the child was able to switch task demands and identify a different object to the one that had previously been reinforced. \r\n\r\nObject bias Control Task. The child was presented with the target picture and the distractor object (3D) and asked to identify the dax/ged/yat/wug. This control task sought to establish if the child was able to override the salience of the 3 dimensional object and successfully choose the target picture. A response which included the distractor object in this task as well as the 3D objects in the three other tasks would be indicative that the child had a bias for selecting objects rather than fully comprehending the word –picture – object relationship.\r\n\r\nGeneralisation task. The child was presented with the target picture and a different coloured exemplar of the target object and asked to identify the dax/ged/yat/wug. The task sought to establish if the child was able to extend the novel label they had previously learnt and generalise it to a different coloured exemplar of the target object. Selecting the novel object in this task would be indicative of a robust understanding that pictures serve as referents for categories of real world objects. \r\n\r\nCoding\r\nOnly intentional responses were coded. This were categorised as such if the child intentionally pointed to or handed or slid the picture / object to the researcher. If a child merely played with the object then their attention was redirected to both objects and the question was asked again. If the child continued to play with the object without intending to respond to the question asked, then this was recorded as a non-response and not included in the final analyses. Responses were coded as picture only, object only or both picture and objects.  Audio and video recordings for those children who gave additional consent were used to clarify any ambiguous responses.\r\n"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"45"},["name","Publisher"],["description","An entity responsible for making the resource available"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1068"},["text","Lancaster University"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"42"},["name","Format"],["description","The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1069"},["text","data/SPSS.sav"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"43"},["name","Identifier"],["description","An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1070"},["text","English9014"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"37"},["name","Contributor"],["description","An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1071"},["text","John Towse"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"47"},["name","Rights"],["description","Information about rights held in and over the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1072"},["text","Open"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"44"},["name","Language"],["description","A language of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1073"},["text","English"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"51"},["name","Type"],["description","The nature or genre of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1074"},["text","Data"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"38"},["name","Coverage"],["description","The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1075"},["text","LA1 4YF"]]]]]],["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"4"},["name","LUSTRE"],["description","Adds LUSTRE specific project information"],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"52"},["name","Supervisor"],["description","Name of the project supervisor"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1076"},["text","Melissa Allen"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"53"},["name","Project Level"],["description","Project levels should be entered as UG or MSC"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1077"},["text","MSc"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"54"},["name","Topic"],["description","Should contain the sub-category of Psychology the project falls under"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1078"},["text","Developmental Psychology"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"56"},["name","Sample Size"],["description"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1079"},["text","Participants were typically developing children who attended a privately owned mixed age early years setting in Lancaster, Lancashire and ranged in age from 2 years to 5 years (M=44 months, s.d= 9.55). Informed parental consent was obtained for 26 children of which 16 were female and 10 were male. One child was excluded from the final analysis due to not attending to the task demands. \r\nSeven children diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder were recruited through contact with a local children’s centre and a speech and language therapist in Lancaster"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"55"},["name","Statistical Analysis Type"],["description","The type of statistical analysis used in the project"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"1080"},["text","ANOVA\r\nchi-square"]]]]]]]],["item",{"itemId":"184","public":"1","featured":"0"},["fileContainer",["file",{"fileId":"206"},["src","https://johnntowse.com/LUSTRE/files/original/59b8e43067d35e93f5ee81d15c7a4b64.doc"],["authentication","dd3a76eadafef3ed40d8695df9cd80d9"]],["file",{"fileId":"207"},["src","https://johnntowse.com/LUSTRE/files/original/c4922da9b1039eb0f71b063458d30d9a.doc"],["authentication","d3b28f1f9a54f497a67f37cd73e2b66c"]]],["collection",{"collectionId":"9"},["elementSetContainer",["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"1"},["name","Dublin Core"],["description","The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/."],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"50"},["name","Title"],["description","A name given to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"499"},["text","Behavioural observations"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"41"},["name","Description"],["description","An account of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"500"},["text","Project focusing on observation of behaviours.\r\nIncludes infant habituation studies"]]]]]]]],["elementSetContainer",["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"1"},["name","Dublin Core"],["description","The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/."],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"50"},["name","Title"],["description","A name given to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3672"},["text","Third Parties and Police Use of Lethal Force: Evidence from the Mapping Police Violence Database "]]]],["element",{"elementId":"39"},["name","Creator"],["description","An entity primarily responsible for making the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3673"},["text","Sian Reid"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"40"},["name","Date"],["description","A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3674"},["text","6th September 2023"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"41"},["name","Description"],["description","An account of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3675"},["text","Over recent years media coverage has highlighted the use of excessive force by some police officers. The use of lethal force towards black and other ethnic minority citizens has been identified as a cause for significant concern. Research in the bystander literature and in non-fatal force policing contexts has identified that third parties can have positive impacts in reducing the severity of these incidences. The role of third parties in fatal force events, however, has not been investigated. This is something which the current study seeks to address. The Mapping Police Violence database was used to identify a year’s worth of lethal force events in the US. Newspaper articles relating to these incidents have been coded in line with a predefined coding framework to examine the presence of third parties in these incidents, and the nature of any social relationships with third parties in relation to the type of lethal force utilised. The results revealed that third parties were present in just under half of incidences and that the presence of a third-party with a pre-existing social relationship to the citizen was associated with a lower likelihood of officers utilising forms of ‘less lethal’ force to the extent that it results in a citizen fatality. These findings highlight the potential importance of third parties in understanding the nature of lethal police citizen interactions, and also the potential protective role the presence of known others may have in reducing the likelihood of officers excessively utilising forms of less lethal force. \r\n"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"49"},["name","Subject"],["description","The topic of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3676"},["text","Lethal force, Third Parties, Police Citizen Interactions, Use of Force"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"48"},["name","Source"],["description","A related resource from which the described resource is derived"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3677"},["text","A secondary data analysis was utilised to examine the presence of third parties in incidences of police use of lethal force. The Mapping Police Violence database (Mapping Police Violence, 2020) was the primary dataset utilised for the study. This is a freely available and open public database compiled by researchers in the US which aims to provide a record of all police involved deaths in the US. This database has been recording police involved deaths in the US since 2013, primarily gathering information through news articles published by various American news outlets. The type of force engaged in by officers that resulted in death was utilised as the outcome variable. The predictor variables were the presence of third parties, the presence of any known third parties, or unknown third parties, the number of officers present, the presence of other emergency services, the location of the incident, the race of the citizen, the gender of the citizen, the alleged presence of a weapon, the initial reason for the encounter, the presence of any digital technology capturing the event and the level of threat posed to the officer. \r\nThe Mapping Police Violence database records multiple variables in relation to these incidences, including individual and situational factors. Several of the predictor variables included in the current study have been gathered from this dataset; specifically, the type of lethal force used, the alleged presence of a weapon, the race of the citizen, the gender of the citizen, the level of threat posed to the officer, the initial encounter reason and the presence of a body worn camera. Within the current study, most of these variables have been used as recorded in the dataset, however, the level of threat posed to the officer has been recategorized. The multiple different levels of threat recorded in the dataset have been regrouped into three categories: attack (indicating the greatest level of threat to the officer), other (referring to any other level of threat), and none (for incidences in which it was clear there was no threat to the officer). In the original data only the presence of a body worn camera is recorded. For the current study this variable has been transformed to include the presence of any digital technology capturing the event, such as CCTV or smartphones, as research has found that the presence of any digital technology and not only a body camera can affect police citizen interactions (Shane et al., 2017). \r\nThe Mapping Police Violence database records the citizen’s cause of death in relation to the type of force utilised. In incidences where multiple types of force have been identified as contributing to the citizen’s death, the database records a list of all types of force involved. The types of force included in the database include gun, taser, pepper spray, baton and physical restraint. For the current study, these types of force have been grouped, to provide an outcome variable with fewer levels. The grouping of the outcome variable has been done in line with previous research looking at police use of force, which identified a gun as a distinct type of force due to the increased risk of lethal outcomes. The other types of force are grouped into a second category of other types of ‘less lethal’ force, as these types of force have been identified as alternatives to the use of a gun, which would be expected to reduce the likelihood of a citizen fatality (Sheppard & Welsh, 2022). In incidences where multiple types of force were used, the most severe form of force has been recorded; for example, if the cause of death is attributed to a gun and a taser, then this incident would be recorded as a gun as the type of lethal force utilised.\r\nThe dataset contains links to the news articles which have been used to gather information regarding each of the individual police involved death incidences. The variables included in the current study relating to the presence of others were gathered by coding these news articles which are linked in the database to the individual incidences of police involved deaths between 6th March 2022 – 6th March 2023, providing a sample of 1,257 police involved deaths. News articles are a source of information which have been identified as having certain limitations, particularly relating to potential media bias in the reporting of crime related stories (Lawrence, 2000). Research looking at the reporting of police use of force incidences by newspapers, however, has found that for many factors there was consistency between news reports and police reports of the same incidents (Ready et al., 2008). For the current study, news articles are utilised due to the promise they provide in allowing the events of police involved deaths to be examined in relation to the presence of third parties. \r\nTo identify the relevant incidences for the current study, three primary exclusion criteria were applied prior to the coding of the news articles. Firstly, to identify incidences with news articles with sufficient information to allow the presence of third parties to be examined, a minimum word count of 150 words was required in at least one of the associated news articles. Secondly, as the study’s primary interest was in the use of lethal force, which involves an on-duty officer using force, only incidences relating to on duty officers were included. Finally, incidences in which the use of force by the officer was accidental, such as car crashes that police officers were involved in, were excluded, as these events have different characteristics to those in which officers intentionally engage in the use of force towards a citizen. The application of these exclusion criteria left a sample of 1052 incidences of police use of lethal force.\r\nTo investigate the presence of others in these incidences, prior to the analysis a predefined behavioural coding scheme (Philpot et al., 2019) was created and applied to the news articles to capture the presence of third parties. This coding scheme contained 12 individual items capturing the presence of third parties and any social ties between third parties and the citizen involved in the incident (See Appendix A for the full coding scheme). Two additional items were included to capture the presence of multiple officers or other emergency services. One code regarding the location of the incident was also included to capture whether it occurred in a public, semi-public or private location. Each of the items were coded for presence with a 1, their absence recorded with a 0, or if it was not clear whether this item was present a 99 was recorded. In total 15 codes were included in this behavioural coding scheme. Here are some examples of these codes relating to the presence of third parties:\r\n“The presence of a third-party with a pre-existing social connection to the primary citizen involved”\r\n“The presence of more than one officer”\r\n“The presence of a third-party with no pre-existing social connection to the primary citizen involved”\r\nTo facilitate the process of coding the news articles in line with the coding scheme, a Qualtrics survey (https://www.qualtrics.com) was created. This survey presented the individual items within the coding framework in a questionnaire format, allowing the items to be coded in the format of closed ended responses to questions relating to the presence of third parties. The responses from the survey were then transferred to an Excel document to allow the data to be prepared for analysis. \r\nEthical approval has been obtained for this study. The study has been reviewed and approved by a member of the Lancaster University Psychology Department, the ethics partner of the supervisors. \r\nThe reliability of the coding scheme and its application to the news articles was assessed through the double coding of 10% of the sample by a second researcher separately to the primary researcher. To assess the level of agreement between the two researchers for each variable, Gwet’s AC1 (Gwets, 2014) coefficient was calculated. In line with the recommendations of Landis and Koch (1977), the resulting coefficients were interpreted in the following way: a value of 0.4 or above indicating moderate agreement, a value of 0.6 or above indicating substantial agreement, and finally a value of 0.8 or above, indicating almost perfect agreement between raters’ scores. For 13 of the variables an agreement level of substantial or almost perfect was reached, as seen in table 1 (appendix B). For the variable relating to the third-party being a friend of the citizen there was no variation in responses (i.e., 100% agreement), and therefore a coefficient could not be calculated. For the location variable, only a moderate level of agreement was found, as a result this variable was excluded for the purpose of analysis. \r\nFigure 1 depicts a flowchart of the process undertaken to sample the relevant incidences. The first part of the flowchart shows the initial process that was undertaken to identify all police involved deaths recorded in the Mapping Police Violence database in the prior 12 months. Following the initial data collection procedure descriptive statistics were run which highlighted that in the initial sample of 1052 incidences there was very limited variation in the outcome variable of the type of lethal force utilised by officers, with 990 incidences involving a gun as the primary cause of death, and only 62 incidences involving other forms of force. In this initial sample a citizen’s cause of death not involving a gun would statistically be considered a rare event, which would have presented challenges in utilising this variable as the outcome in any subsequent analyses. In line with the recommendations of research (Shaer et al., 2019), an oversampling approach was chosen to overcome the limitations of having a rare event in the outcome variable, with further incidences in the dataset that did not involve a gun as the cause of death being oversampled so at least 10% of the sample involved a cause of death other than a gun. As can be seen in figure 1, for these incidences to be as similar to the primary sample as possible, they were only sampled for the three preceding years to limit any additional sample variation that may have been introduced by sampling a wider date range. This led to the identification of a further 182 incidences where the citizen’s cause of death did not involve a gun. The same exclusion criteria were then applied to this sample, with a further 65 incidences excluded, leaving a sample of 117 additional incidences which were coded in line with the same procedure as the initial sample. This oversampling procedure led to a final sample of 1169 incidences. \r\n\r\nThe data analysis involved chi square tests of independence, to examine whether the presence of others during fatal police citizen interactions had a statistically significant relationship with the outcome variable of the type of lethal force utilised by officers. Due to the exploratory nature of the study there was not a predicted direction or nature of the relationship between the predictor variables relating to third-party presence and the type of fatal force utilised by officers (McIntosh, 2017). Prior to the main analyses, descriptive statistics were run to investigate distributions within variables and to allow any rare event variables to be identified. \r\n"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"45"},["name","Publisher"],["description","An entity responsible for making the resource available"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3678"},["text","Lancaster University"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"42"},["name","Format"],["description","The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3679"},["text","Data/Excel.csv"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"43"},["name","Identifier"],["description","An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3680"},["text","Reid2023"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"37"},["name","Contributor"],["description","An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3681"},["text","John Oyewole\r\nMichelle Kan"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"47"},["name","Rights"],["description","Information about rights held in and over the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3682"},["text","Open"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"46"},["name","Relation"],["description","A related resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3683"},["text","None"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"44"},["name","Language"],["description","A language of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3684"},["text","English"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"51"},["name","Type"],["description","The nature or genre of the resource"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3685"},["text","Data"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"38"},["name","Coverage"],["description","The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3686"},["text","LA1 4YF"]]]]]],["elementSet",{"elementSetId":"4"},["name","LUSTRE"],["description","Adds LUSTRE specific project information"],["elementContainer",["element",{"elementId":"52"},["name","Supervisor"],["description","Name of the project supervisor"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3727"},["text","Dr Mark Levine\r\nDr Richard Philpot"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"53"},["name","Project Level"],["description","Project levels should be entered as UG or MSC"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3728"},["text","MSc"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"54"},["name","Topic"],["description","Should contain the sub-category of Psychology the project falls under"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3729"},["text","Social Psychology"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"56"},["name","Sample Size"],["description"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3730"},["text","1169 incidents"]]]],["element",{"elementId":"55"},["name","Statistical Analysis Type"],["description","The type of statistical analysis used in the project"],["elementTextContainer",["elementText",{"elementTextId":"3731"},["text","Pearson's Chi Square\r\nChi Square Goodness of Fit"]]]]]]]]]