<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<itemContainer xmlns="http://omeka.org/schemas/omeka-xml/v5" 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-xml&amp;page=9&amp;sort_field=Dublin+Core%2CCreator" accessDate="2026-05-23T06:12:35+00:00">
  <miscellaneousContainer>
    <pagination>
      <pageNumber>9</pageNumber>
      <perPage>10</perPage>
      <totalResults>148</totalResults>
    </pagination>
  </miscellaneousContainer>
  <item itemId="49" public="1" featured="0">
    <collection collectionId="4">
      <elementSetContainer>
        <elementSet elementSetId="1">
          <name>Dublin Core</name>
          <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/.</description>
          <elementContainer>
            <element elementId="50">
              <name>Title</name>
              <description>A name given to the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="183">
                  <text>Focus group</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
            <element elementId="41">
              <name>Description</name>
              <description>An account of the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="184">
                  <text>Primarily qualitative analysis based on forming focus groups to collect opinions and attitudes on a topic of interest</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
          </elementContainer>
        </elementSet>
      </elementSetContainer>
    </collection>
    <elementSetContainer>
      <elementSet elementSetId="1">
        <name>Dublin Core</name>
        <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/.</description>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="50">
            <name>Title</name>
            <description>A name given to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1394">
                <text>An Exploration of the Use and Effectiveness of Nature Imagery, Metaphor, and Symbolism in Advertising. </text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="39">
            <name>Creator</name>
            <description>An entity primarily responsible for making the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1395">
                <text>Konstantinos Perimenis</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="40">
            <name>Date</name>
            <description>A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1396">
                <text>2018</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="41">
            <name>Description</name>
            <description>An account of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1397">
                <text>Core participation of nature imagery, indoor scenery, visual metaphor, and literal image in the construction of commercials and advertising industry has been established through repeated research. The current study aims to deeper investigate regarding the role of two specific components of aesthetic communication (nature imagery, poetry) in advertising. Results suggested that between nature imagery and indoor scenery there was a significant preference to nature imagery. However, results from the comparison between visual metaphor and literal image indicated a more divided outcome with participants suggesting that both presented as equally appealing. Overall, our results suggest that nature imagery was established to be the &#13;
most significant component towards forming an appealing advertisement. We indicated that further research could investigate and highlight the effectiveness of other mediator components of aesthetics (verbal language, humour, music, etc) in advertising.</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="49">
            <name>Subject</name>
            <description>The topic of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1398">
                <text>Nature imagery in advertising, symbolism in advertising, metaphors in advertising</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="48">
            <name>Source</name>
            <description>A related resource from which the described resource is derived</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1399">
                <text>&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; In all focus groups, a digital voice recorder was used for further analysis. The first selected pair of ads, with indoor and outdoor imageries, was about Coca-Cola brand. At the first Coca Cola’s ad film, which was broadcasted for the first time in 2010, participants had the chance to watch two young people inside an overcrowded bus. Even if these two passengers were completely strangers, they finally broke the ice between them, thanks to an invisible Coca-Cola bottle. At the second Coca-Cola’s commercial, diversity in terms of gender, religion and race, within the United States of America, was presented. At the same time, the viewers were given the opportunity of admiring some of the most breathtaking landscapes in USA.&lt;/p&gt;&#13;
&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; The second selected pair of ads, in terms of connotative and denotative imageries, was about Smirnoff brand. At the Smirnoff’s connotative commercial, there were clear signs that its creators intended to show temptation and seduction.&amp;nbsp; From the beginning it was clear that the starring couple was meant to represent a modern day Adam and Eve. As the music picked up, snakes appeared from the bartender’s sleeves to help make an Apple Bite and the customers got up to dance in a fast-paced song. The bartender was leading ‘Adam and Eve’ to the apple flavour cocktail and the fast-paced music suggested that something big would happen if the drink was taken.&amp;nbsp; This also insinuated that the drink was so desirable that they would not be able to resist the apple drink. At the denotative one, there was a stylish, classy man that was just listing the values of Smirnoff vodka. The initial 40 advertisements were selected randomly from Coloribus.com (See Appendix H for full links) an online databases for commercials and advertisements.&lt;/p&gt;&#13;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#13;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;Data analysis &lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#13;
&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; Responses to the focus groups’ questions were thematically analyzed. &amp;nbsp;The current research followed the six step thematic analysis approach as described by Braun and Clarke (2006). Notes of detailed observation were used to generate and apply codes to the qualitative data and to identify potential themes, as the small sample gave us that opportunity.&lt;/p&gt;</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="45">
            <name>Publisher</name>
            <description>An entity responsible for making the resource available</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1400">
                <text>Lancaster University</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="44">
            <name>Language</name>
            <description>A language of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1401">
                <text>English</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="51">
            <name>Type</name>
            <description>The nature or genre of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1402">
                <text>Data</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="42">
            <name>Format</name>
            <description>The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1403">
                <text>WAV</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="43">
            <name>Identifier</name>
            <description>An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1404">
                <text>Perimenis2018</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="47">
            <name>Rights</name>
            <description>Information about rights held in and over the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1405">
                <text>Open</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="38">
            <name>Coverage</name>
            <description>The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1406">
                <text>LA2 0PF</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
      <elementSet elementSetId="4">
        <name>LUSTRE</name>
        <description>Adds LUSTRE specific project information</description>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="52">
            <name>Supervisor</name>
            <description>Name of the project supervisor</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1407">
                <text>Leslie Hallam</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="53">
            <name>Project Level</name>
            <description>Project levels should be entered as UG or MSC</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1408">
                <text>MSC</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="54">
            <name>Topic</name>
            <description>Should contain the sub-category of Psychology the project falls under</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1409">
                <text>Psychology of Advertising</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="56">
            <name>Sample Size</name>
            <description/>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1410">
                <text>For the purpose of advertisement selection a pilot group was conducted consisted of 3 participants. Following the advertisement selection, two focus groups were formed, 6 participants were included in the first focus group, and 7 in the second focus group. Participants recruited in the pilot group and both focus groups (N= 16) were students from Lancaster University (age range 22-28). Inclusion criteria required participants to be above the age of 18 and be able to physically attend the focus group. Participants of both focus groups were 5 males, 8 females, and participants consisted the pilot group 2 males, and 1 female.  </text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="55">
            <name>Statistical Analysis Type</name>
            <description>The type of statistical analysis used in the project</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1411">
                <text>Qualitative</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
    </elementSetContainer>
  </item>
  <item itemId="34" public="1" featured="0">
    <collection collectionId="10">
      <elementSetContainer>
        <elementSet elementSetId="1">
          <name>Dublin Core</name>
          <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/.</description>
          <elementContainer>
            <element elementId="50">
              <name>Title</name>
              <description>A name given to the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="819">
                  <text>Interviews</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
          </elementContainer>
        </elementSet>
      </elementSetContainer>
    </collection>
    <elementSetContainer>
      <elementSet elementSetId="1">
        <name>Dublin Core</name>
        <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/.</description>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="50">
            <name>Title</name>
            <description>A name given to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1081">
                <text>Effects of service brands’ current marketing strategies on customer attitude and behaviour</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="39">
            <name>Creator</name>
            <description>An entity primarily responsible for making the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1082">
                <text>Laura Gould</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="40">
            <name>Date</name>
            <description>A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1083">
                <text>2013</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="41">
            <name>Description</name>
            <description>An account of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1084">
                <text>This project investigated current marketing strategies used by service brands, including car insurance and household energy companies, on customer’s attitudes and behaviours. The investigation involved a nationally representative sample of 1,977 participants completing an online survey, along with 30 participants taking part in a supporting qualitative online community panel exploring customers’ attitudes in more depth. Descriptive analysis showed that although participants’ loyalty reasons and bad provider experiences were predominantly determined by price, service quality was also an important factor. When choosing service providers, participants showed no preference between price and service, however slightly preferred price over reputation. Furthermore, significant correlations were found for the majority of provider switching attitudes and switching behaviours. Segmentation analysis identified four types of customers based on awareness of offers and convenience to switch: ‘Passive Loyals’, ‘Sceptical Loyals’, ‘Loyal Opportunity Switchers’ and ‘Conditioned Switchers’. A pattern was found amongst age groups – the older the participant, the more likely they preferred new customer deals over loyalty offers, were more interested in price over service quality and brand reputation, and had more expertise in the service industry. Due to the importance of customer retention (Berry, 1983), results implied brands should focus on loyalty rewards, along with gaining customers’ trust in their service quality and reliability.�</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="48">
            <name>Source</name>
            <description>A related resource from which the described resource is derived</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1085">
                <text>Materials and procedure&#13;
	The online survey included both closed and open questions, thus a mixture of quantitative and qualitative methods. Participants were asked a few demographic questions: their gender, age, employment status, type of residence, location, and how long they had been a UK resident. Those who had not been screened were quizzed on their switching and service provider behaviours and attitudes. The questions were repeated for each service type, depending on whether participants had confirmed to paying for, or making decisions on electricity, gas or car insurance, and whether they’re household energy was on a dual fuel package or organised separately. The questions that were repeated were a select few, which required separate data for each service type. These included inquiries into people’s prior switching behaviour, reasons for maintaining a relationship with their current provider, and any ‘bad’ experiences they had encountered with a service provider. This was then followed by general attitudinal scales concerned with loyalty and switching amongst service providers. The data was collected in Confirmit, a software used to create, monitor and analyse online surveys (http://www.confirmit.com/). The quantitative information was analysed in Reportal, Confirmit’s analysis feature. The qualitative answers were transferred into Microsoft Excel, and examined through the CIT (Flanagan, 1954).&#13;
&#13;
Stage 2:&#13;
Method&#13;
The second stage of the project involved segmenting participants into different groups, in order to identify different people’s needs and desires in regard to switching and loyalty, and how brands should consider different types of individuals in their marketing and advertising. First, segmentation dimensions were established, and every participants was assigned to a particular segmentation cluster. Secondly, the different segments were profiled to make each group as distinct as possible. &#13;
Segmentation&#13;
Identifying the segments was explorative, thus there were no set guidelines as to which dimensions to use. However, segmentation was based around the idea of switching and loyalty, and whether participants were able to be classed as different types of customers according to this. Attitudinal scales used in the online survey in stage 1 were either negatively or positively related to switching. Using k cluster means analysis on SPSS, the following variables were used as dimensions for the segmentation (along with the statements used in the online survey):&#13;
Convenience of switching: I find that switching service providers is inconvenient&#13;
Awareness of other deals: I’m not aware of offers available from other providers other than my current one&#13;
The first variable determined how constrained individuals were from switching brands. This gave an idea of whether participants felt dedicated or constrained by service brands (constrained by brands: Stanley &amp; Markman, 1992). If a person found switching convenient, they were not held by constraints to stay within the company, thus were more likely to remain with the provider due to their brand dedication.&#13;
The second variable determined participants’ characteristics, whether they actively sought to evaluate other providers’ offers (awareness of other offers: Zeithaml, 1981).  According to the research, if someone showed both awareness of other offers and convenience to switch, the individual felt they were more able to switch and were presumably more likely to switch. &#13;
Both statements were answered on a 10 point scale in the online survey, thus when segmentation divisions were made according to these dimensions, the following cluster centres for each segment were identified:&#13;
segments&#13;
I find that switching service providers is inconvenient&#13;
&#13;
I’m not aware of offers available from other providers other than my current one&#13;
&#13;
1&#13;
8&#13;
8&#13;
2&#13;
8&#13;
3&#13;
3&#13;
5&#13;
6&#13;
4&#13;
3&#13;
2&#13;
Table 4. Typical scores observed for each statement across the 4 segments identified&#13;
Each participant who took part in the survey was assigned to one of the four segments according to their scores on the two dimensions. Whichever segment cluster centres were closest to their scores determined their segment group.&#13;
The next phase of the segmentation process was profiling each group in order to make them as identifiable and different to the other groups as possible. This was carried out by comparing answers from the online survey by producing crosstabs across the four clusters. Once the variation of answers were cross tabbed, comparisons were able to be carried out. This gave an insight into how many people in a particular segment gave a certain answer to the questions. In order to find any significant differences from the overall mean, answers were indexed. &#13;
Indexing&#13;
	Indexing was used to look at how over-represented or under-represented certain characteristics were for the four segments, relative to the base sample (1,977 participants). This was carried out by calculating an index score:&#13;
Percentage incidence of the variable for the target group	x 100&#13;
Percentage incidence of the variable for the base group &#13;
The index score indicated whether the variables for the two groups were showing significant differences. Comparing them gave an idea of which variable was over indexing the most or least, giving a picture of what ‘ingredients’  may be making up the main differences between segments. Generally an index of less than 80 or greater than 120 was considered significantly statistically different.&#13;
Supporting qualitative attitudes &#13;
This was supported by a of the project involved an in-depth qualitative investigation, exploring participants’ attitudes on brand loyalty and switching, past experiences with household energy and car insurance providers, and attitudes on current loyalty and switching strategies. Participants were identified into 1 of the four segments and analysed through noting important themes and patterns of people’s attitudes in the data. &#13;
</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="45">
            <name>Publisher</name>
            <description>An entity responsible for making the resource available</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1086">
                <text>Lancaster University</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="42">
            <name>Format</name>
            <description>The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1087">
                <text>data/excel.xlsx</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="43">
            <name>Identifier</name>
            <description>An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1088">
                <text>Gould2013</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="37">
            <name>Contributor</name>
            <description>An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1089">
                <text>John Towse</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="47">
            <name>Rights</name>
            <description>Information about rights held in and over the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1090">
                <text>Open</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="44">
            <name>Language</name>
            <description>A language of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1091">
                <text>English</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="51">
            <name>Type</name>
            <description>The nature or genre of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1092">
                <text>Data</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="38">
            <name>Coverage</name>
            <description>The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1093">
                <text>LA1 4YF</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
      <elementSet elementSetId="4">
        <name>LUSTRE</name>
        <description>Adds LUSTRE specific project information</description>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="52">
            <name>Supervisor</name>
            <description>Name of the project supervisor</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1094">
                <text>Leslie Hallam</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="53">
            <name>Project Level</name>
            <description>Project levels should be entered as UG or MSC</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1095">
                <text>MSc</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="54">
            <name>Topic</name>
            <description>Should contain the sub-category of Psychology the project falls under</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1096">
                <text>Psychology of Advertising</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="56">
            <name>Sample Size</name>
            <description/>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1097">
                <text>A nationally representative sample of 1977 participants were recruited, all over 18 years of age in order to comply with the MRS code of conduct (https://www.mrs.org.uk/standards/code_of_conduct/) and were picked according to the current UK’s demographic statistics (see appendix C). Furthermore, individuals were screened from the survey if they had lived in the UK for only a very short period of time as they would not have had enough experience with household energy and car insurance providers to reliably compare them on their previous switching behaviour. Individuals were also screened if they were not involved in the payment of, or in the decision making for household energy or car insurance. 2596 people took part in the survey, which included those who did not fully complete the questions (338), started the survey after the deadline (21) and those that did not comply with the projects’ requirements (236). This left a total of 2001 complete responses which were used in the project. &#13;
The qualitative data collection involved recruiting 30 participants of those who opted to take part in further research from the 1,977 original sample. A mixture of dual fuel, gas, electricity and car insurance customers were contacted via email (200 emails in total) (see appendix E.1). Of those that responded, 30 were chosen to take part in the qualitative research</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="55">
            <name>Statistical Analysis Type</name>
            <description>The type of statistical analysis used in the project</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1098">
                <text>qualitative</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
    </elementSetContainer>
  </item>
  <item itemId="89" public="1" featured="0">
    <collection collectionId="11">
      <elementSetContainer>
        <elementSet elementSetId="1">
          <name>Dublin Core</name>
          <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/.</description>
          <elementContainer>
            <element elementId="50">
              <name>Title</name>
              <description>A name given to the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="987">
                  <text>Secondary analysis</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
          </elementContainer>
        </elementSet>
      </elementSetContainer>
    </collection>
    <elementSetContainer>
      <elementSet elementSetId="1">
        <name>Dublin Core</name>
        <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/.</description>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="50">
            <name>Title</name>
            <description>A name given to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2033">
                <text>Does the use of prompts in shared reading facilitate the quantity and quality of language in Down Syndrome children?</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="39">
            <name>Creator</name>
            <description>An entity primarily responsible for making the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2034">
                <text>Laura J. Durrans</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="40">
            <name>Date</name>
            <description>A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2035">
                <text>2017</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="41">
            <name>Description</name>
            <description>An account of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2036">
                <text>Children with Down syndrome typically present with specific linguistic and communicative difficulties. The present study aims to explore how dialogic prompted reading facilitates better quality and quantity of language production in pre-school aged Down syndrome children. Research has demonstrated how reading interventions enhance typically developing children’s linguistic qualities, yet few studies have investigated the beneficial effects of dialogic prompted reading among Down syndrome children. Eight Down syndrome and 8 typically developing children completed two shared reading tasks with their mothers. One task involved reading a book containing a series of prompted questions, the other book contained no prompts. As predicted, prompted reading resulted in the development of more complex syntax, better vocabulary production and facilitated better responses accuracy to literal and inferential concepts, in Down syndrome children. In addition, the inclusion of prompts also increased parental scaffolding techniques for both diagnostic groups. The results from this study indicate that dialogic prompted reading does improve Down syndrome children’s qualitative and quantitative linguistic abilities and promotes better communication with parents during shared reading tasks. These findings highlight the educational significance of prompted dialogic reading as a highly beneficial intervention for developing an array of linguistic qualities in children with Down syndrome.</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="49">
            <name>Subject</name>
            <description>The topic of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2037">
                <text>Down syndrome, linguistic abilities, dialogic reading, prompted reading.</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="48">
            <name>Source</name>
            <description>A related resource from which the described resource is derived</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2038">
                <text>Participants&#13;
A total of 16 children and their mothers took part in this study. Eight children with Down syndrome (DS: 4 female, 4 male, age range = 4.58 years to 6.75 years, Mage = 5.3 years) and 8 typically developing children (TD: 2 female, 6 male, age range = 3.9 years to 6.66 years, Mage = 5.1 years). This is a secondary data analysis study and all participants were previously recruited by the principle investigator and supervisor, Kate Cain. Video recordings of all child-parent reading dyads were made and were transcribed into written from. The Departmental Ethics Committee approved this study prior to the author receiving any video or transcribed data.&#13;
Stimuli &#13;
In this study, mothers were given two books to read with their children, ‘Mooncake’ and ‘Skyfire’ (Asch, 2014; 2014). Parents were asked to read both books as they normally would read at home with their child. One version of each book contained a series of 12 prompts which were inserted at specific points and parents where asked read them aloud as they went through the book (based on Van Kleek et al, 2006). Between both books there were a total of 24 prompts. For each book, prompts were evenly split between 4 sub-categories: picture labelling prompts “What is that? (pointing to Bear)”, vocabulary prompts “What does ‘hollow’ mean?”, inference prompts “ Why did Bear fall asleep?”, and general knowledge prompts “What else could Bear have used to stick the spoon to the arrow?”. The aim of the prompts was to encourage communication and scaffolding interactions between mothers and children when reading together. These books where specifically selected for multiple reasons: first, they have been successfully used in previous studies investigating linguistic impairments in pre-school aged children with language difficulties (Van Kleek et al 1997; 2006; Hammet, Van Kleek &amp; Huberty, 2003). Second, the classic story-line of each book provides opportunities for children to follow a written and pictorial narrative, enhancing their visual perception skills, as well as being age suitable and cognitively stimulating for DS and TD children (Gibson 1996; Engevik et al 2016).&#13;
Procedure and Design&#13;
Parent/child reading dyads were separated into groups based on diagnosis, where DS children and their mothers formed the experimental group, and TD children and their mothers formed the control group. There were two conditions; typical ‘unprompted’ reading and prompted reading. All participants took part in all conditions. In the unprompted reading condition, parents were given one of the books, selected at random (i.e ‘mooncake’) and asked to read with their child as they would normally read at home. In the prompted reading condition, parents were given the other book (i.e ‘skyefire’) and asked to read with their child as they normally would at home, but to additionally ask the twelve prompts that were inserted into the book. Within each condition, the order in which each child/parent dyad read each book was counterbalanced, as well as the order of books being presented between diagnostic groups was counterbalanced.&#13;
         The experimental sessions were conducted either in a university lab or at the participants home, and was a record session. The researcher did not take part in reading sessions, and was there for recording purposes only. Each reading session was audio and video recorded, which was later transcribed in to written format using Microsoft Excel. The specific areas of language where coded for using the Excel written transcript and then inputted into SPSS for statistical analysis.&#13;
&#13;
&#13;
Coding Categories&#13;
Child and parent speech were coded for under the following categories: children’s production of language (length and syntax), children’s production of specific vocabulary types (nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs, affirmatives and fillers), parents use of questions (literal and inferential questioning styles), children’s language abilities in response to questions (literal and inferential), accuracy of children’s response to questions (literal and inferential), parental scaffolding techniques and children linguistic abilities in response to scaffolding techniques. This was done so the direct effects of prompted reading on a variety children’s language abilities could be primarily investigated, as well as assessing the effect prompted reading has on parental scaffolding techniques. &#13;
Length and Syntax: total number of utterances, total number of words and mean length of utterances produced by children The total number of utterances produced by DS and TD children was coded for using a simple counting strategy, from the written transcripts in Microsoft Excel. Each sentence spoken by both groups of children, including singular words which posed as a sentence, were tallied to create the total number of utterances, between reading conditions. The total number of words was calculated by totalling every word in each utterance across both reading conditions, and the mean length of utterance was calculated by dividing by the total number of words by the total number of utterances each child spoke. Inaudible speech and vocalisations were not included in the coding, neither where onomatopoeic noises children made, such as ‘Zzzzz’ when pretending to be a bee, as they are representations of sound not speech. Onomatopoeic speech, for example ‘splash’ or ‘bang’ was included in the coding process as they are representations of speech. Additionally, speech where children were reading sections of the book alongside their mothers was excluded from the coding process, for the sole reason that reading alongside a parent does not represent language ability but reflects their reading ability. Each child had a score for the total number of utterances, total number of words and mean length of utterances produced for prompted and unprompted reading conditions, which were then inputted into statistical software SPSS. These factors represent the quantity element of language.&#13;
Vocabulary Production: nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs, affirmatives and fillers Children’s vocabulary production was coded under six sub-categories: nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs, affirmatives and fillers. These specific categories were chosen as previous research investigating vocabulary within DS has demonstrated that children present difficulties producing complex vocabulary categories, therefore two tiers of vocabulary were created: ‘basic’ vocabulary (nouns and verbs) and ‘complex’ vocabulary (adjectives and adverbs), to assess the effect of prompted reading on a large selection of vocabulary categories, rather than focusing on one particular type of vocabulary. These specific vocabulary categories are also applicable to the age range of children used in the study. Affirmatives (‘yes’, ‘no’ and ‘don’t know’) were coded for to investigate whether prompted reading affected the use of simplistic answers, specifically whether prompted reading decreased affirmative answers. Questions asked by children, like ‘what?’ and ‘why?’ were also included in the affirmative category, as they reflect an aspect of speech where a child is requesting for more information to further engage with the parent. Child questioning was rare and therefore did not require a category of its own. ‘Fillers’, additional words that make up a sentence, were also totalled. This was to investigate whether prompted reading facilitated more structured sentences, and therefore increased the number of fillers children produced. This was of particular interest for the DS group, as children with DS present difficulties in sentence structure. The total amount of vocabulary produced (inc. affirmatives and fillers) would therefore be equal to the total number of words produced.&#13;
Literal and Inferential Parental Questioning and Language Production Children’s ability to respond to literal and inferential questioning during shared reading sessions was coded for by adapting a four-level coding system previously used in studies investigating literal and inferential language in pre-school aged children (Van Kleek et al, 2003; Tompkins et al, 2013; Engevik et al, 2016). Previous coding schemes were designed to assess children’s literal and inferential speech across four linguistic domains, where the first two levels (Level 1 and Level 2) resemble children’s literal language, and the second two levels (Level 3 and Level 4) represent children’s inferential language (Blank, Rose &amp; Berlin, 1978).&#13;
          For the present study, children’s linguistic responses to literal and inferential questioning was only assessed under a 2 level system, where Level 1 represented speech in response to literal questioning, and Level 2 represented speech in response to inferential questioning. This adaptation was done to take into account DS children’s linguistic abilities, as a four-level coding system would have been too advanced for the particular task. Since DS children’s understanding of cognitive concepts and inferential questioning is limited, their linguistic responses to such questions would also be limited, therefore a two-level coding system was more acceptable.&#13;
          For each set of 12 prompted questions used, 50% represented literal concepts (Level 1) and 50% represented inferential concepts (Level 2). Level 1 coded for children’s responses to labelling prompts (“What is that?”- pointing at Bear) and vocabulary prompts (“What does ‘hollow’ mean?”). Level 2 coded for children’s responses to inference prompts (“Why did Bear fall asleep?”) and general knowledge prompts (“What else could Bear have used to stick the spoon to the arrow?”). Parental prompts where also coded and separated between literal and inferential levels. The number of textual prompts and parental prompts where coded using a binary counting strategy, as well as the level of each question (literal or inferential) recorded. For each prompt, children’s responses where coded based their correct or incorrect response and vocabulary production (nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs and affirmatives) so each child had a score of response and vocabulary production for literal and inferential questioning, between prompted and unprompted reading conditions. (An example of the coding system can be seen in Appendix A).This particular coding method was designed to assess the extent to which textual and parental literal and inferential prompts enhanced children’s linguistic qualities, and pin point whether a specific type of questioning facilitated more correct responses and production of more vocabulary. &#13;
Scaffolding Techniques and Language Production Parents ability to successfully utilise scaffolding techniques between reading conditions was assessed, through designing a coding system that recorded each time parents took a break from reading the text to direct questions, these were labelled as ‘turn-taking sections’. The total number of turn-taking sections was coded, as well as the total number of questions parents asked per section and whether each question was literal or inferential. This was done to assess whether prompted reading encouraged parents to take more breaks from reading the text to ask their child questions, whether each time parents took breaks they asked more literal or inferential questions to engage their child. In addition to this, whether parental scaffolding enhanced children’s linguistic abilities were also assessed. This was done by coding the total number of words children produced per section, which would show whether parental scaffolding techniques enhanced children linguistic contribution. (An example of the coding system can be seen in Appendix B). &#13;
Accuracy The accuracy of children’s responses, in relation to literal and inferential questioning, was coded by using a three-level coding system, used by previous studies investigating accuracy of children language during shared reading (Engevik et al, 2016). Previously, children’s accuracy of response was coded for along a linguistic continuum, where ‘fully adequate’ represented accurate verbal responses, ‘partially adequate’ reflected verbal communication which is ‘on the right track’ but not necessarily accurate, and ‘inadequate’ which represented any response that was irrelevant (Sorsby &amp; Martlew, 1991; Engevik et al, 2016). Previous studies investigating accuracy of speech in DS children have adapted the coding system to merge ‘fully’ and ‘partially’ accurate categories together, to take into account the linguistic and cognitive difficulties DS children face (based on Engevik et al, 2016). However, the present study uses a slightly adapted version of the original coding system, where children’s ‘fully’, ‘partially’ and ‘not’ accuracy of responses were coded, yet only children’s ‘fully’ accurate responses will be used in the final analysis. This was done so children’s fully accurate responses to literal and inferential parental questioning could be assessed. ‘Partially’ and ‘not’ accurate responses were not assessed in this particular study as the sole interest is children’s ‘fully’ accurate response. The reason as to why ‘fully’ and ‘partially’ categories weren’t merged for the present study was to gain a more realistic understanding of children’s fully accurate responses, and merging categories would not provide this. (An example of the coding system can be seen in Appendix C).&#13;
</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="45">
            <name>Publisher</name>
            <description>An entity responsible for making the resource available</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2039">
                <text>Lancaster University</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="42">
            <name>Format</name>
            <description>The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2040">
                <text>Data/SPSS.sav</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="43">
            <name>Identifier</name>
            <description>An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2041">
                <text>Durrans2017</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="37">
            <name>Contributor</name>
            <description>An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2042">
                <text>Rebecca James</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="47">
            <name>Rights</name>
            <description>Information about rights held in and over the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2043">
                <text>Open</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="46">
            <name>Relation</name>
            <description>A related resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2044">
                <text>None</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="44">
            <name>Language</name>
            <description>A language of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2045">
                <text>English</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="51">
            <name>Type</name>
            <description>The nature or genre of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2046">
                <text>Data</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="38">
            <name>Coverage</name>
            <description>The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2047">
                <text>LA1 4YF</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
      <elementSet elementSetId="4">
        <name>LUSTRE</name>
        <description>Adds LUSTRE specific project information</description>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="52">
            <name>Supervisor</name>
            <description>Name of the project supervisor</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2048">
                <text>Kate Cain</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="53">
            <name>Project Level</name>
            <description>Project levels should be entered as UG or MSC</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2049">
                <text>MSc</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="54">
            <name>Topic</name>
            <description>Should contain the sub-category of Psychology the project falls under</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2050">
                <text>None</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="56">
            <name>Sample Size</name>
            <description/>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2051">
                <text>8 children with Down syndrome and 8 typically developing children</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="55">
            <name>Statistical Analysis Type</name>
            <description>The type of statistical analysis used in the project</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2052">
                <text>None</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
    </elementSetContainer>
  </item>
  <item itemId="79" public="1" featured="0">
    <fileContainer>
      <file fileId="35">
        <src>https://johnntowse.com/LUSTRE/files/original/8f2f87e573c831b72cee2c8b8ba543dc.pdf</src>
        <authentication>f34ccfe7021afea913451a930716e424</authentication>
      </file>
      <file fileId="36">
        <src>https://johnntowse.com/LUSTRE/files/original/9fc3d7b08fbf5aba53f3d3f32bc10296.pdf</src>
        <authentication>1697756e4beef9e38469b4104adb6c7b</authentication>
      </file>
      <file fileId="37">
        <src>https://johnntowse.com/LUSTRE/files/original/6e8fe4b7fd6c4b29c575e3b1249198eb.pdf</src>
        <authentication>f1ee4628271e3179323d196a01d03e3c</authentication>
      </file>
      <file fileId="77">
        <src>https://johnntowse.com/LUSTRE/files/original/4c4162827312b2c2d00e7c64b9587ebd.csv</src>
        <authentication>ed6519051947a6e4b43340598a2c7bf9</authentication>
      </file>
      <file fileId="78">
        <src>https://johnntowse.com/LUSTRE/files/original/fe12af25b11cfb5f017a248c53c613e3.csv</src>
        <authentication>aadf65e48136716fdfc5f72bb3921dbe</authentication>
      </file>
    </fileContainer>
    <collection collectionId="5">
      <elementSetContainer>
        <elementSet elementSetId="1">
          <name>Dublin Core</name>
          <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/.</description>
          <elementContainer>
            <element elementId="50">
              <name>Title</name>
              <description>A name given to the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="185">
                  <text>Questionnaire-based study</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
            <element elementId="41">
              <name>Description</name>
              <description>An account of the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="186">
                  <text>An analysis of self-report data from the administration of questionnaires(s)</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
          </elementContainer>
        </elementSet>
      </elementSetContainer>
    </collection>
    <elementSetContainer>
      <elementSet elementSetId="1">
        <name>Dublin Core</name>
        <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/.</description>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="50">
            <name>Title</name>
            <description>A name given to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1834">
                <text>Investigating the Effects of Challenging Behaviour on the Sibling Relationship: Influenced by Behaviour Topography and Shaped by Attributions of Controllability?</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="39">
            <name>Creator</name>
            <description>An entity primarily responsible for making the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1835">
                <text>Lauren Laverick-Brown</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="40">
            <name>Date</name>
            <description>A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1836">
                <text>2018</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="41">
            <name>Description</name>
            <description>An account of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1837">
                <text>Challenging behaviour (CB) displayed by individuals with an intellectual disability (ID) is consistently identified as a stressor on the relationship that they have with their typically developing (TD) sibling. Given the potentially damaging effects of CB on the quality of the sibling relationship and the wellbeing of the TD sibling, understanding the cognitions that underpin TD siblings’ emotional and behavioural responses to CB is essential to direct sibling-targeted psychoeducational interventions. This study considered whether siblings’ responses to CB vary according to behavioural topography. Further, the study considered whether any effects detected were shaped by attributions made by TD individuals regarding the controllability of their siblings’ CB. Thirty-eight siblings of individuals with ID, and 36 participants with a nondisabled sibling, completed a web-based questionnaire measuring participants’ positive and negative affect towards their sibling, the nature of their sibling’s CB, and controllability perceptions regarding their sibling’s CB. The results of this study reiterate that CB is a stressor on the sibling relationship, with externally directed CB (i.e. aggression, destruction) eliciting greater negative affect in siblings compared to internally directed behaviours (i.e. self-injury). However, it could not be concluded with an appropriate level of significance (i.e. p&lt;.05) that this was due to participants perceiving their siblings as more in control of their externally directed behaviours. These findings may have resulted from the diverse nature of the participant group. Further research is required to examine specific differences in the emotional impact of each type of challenging behaviour (and then subsequently, whether any differences detected arise due to contrasting perceptions of behaviour controllability).</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="48">
            <name>Source</name>
            <description>A related resource from which the described resource is derived</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1838">
                <text>Participants&#13;
Seventy-four TD individuals who had a sibling completed this study. Participants were allocated to one of two conditions according to whether they had a sibling with an ID, or did not (i.e. their sibling was TD). There were 38 participants who had a sibling with ID (82% female, Mage=27.32, SD=9.65) and 36 participants with a TD sibling (92% female, Mage=28.61, SD=10.81); ranging between 13 to 60 years old. Siblings diagnoses are reported in Table 1. &#13;
Table 1: Diagnoses of participants' siblings&#13;
&#13;
&#13;
Participants were recruited on a voluntary basis through social media advertisements posted by the researcher and by disability organisations (who also sent emails to their followers), and through word of mouth. The researcher developed a digital research flyer summarising study’s purpose and procedure, distributed as described above. To incentivise participation, participants had the option to enter themselves in a prize draw for a £20 Amazon voucher upon completion of the study. &#13;
A minimum participation age was determined after inputting the text of each questionnaire included in the study into Coh-Metrix (Version 3.0; Graesser, McNamara, Louwerse &amp; Cai, 2004): a web-based software tool assessing the cohesion and coherence of a text. Coh Metrix provides an index of readability by generating the reading age of a piece of text, and the reading age determined of the questionnaires was “grade six”; indicating that 10/11-year-olds should have the ability to comprehend and respond to questions. Thus, it was decided that the questionnaires were suitable for TD individuals aged 12 or above.&#13;
Consent was gained from all those over 16 years of age, and parental consent for and assent from those aged 12-15 years of age (see “Ethical Considerations” below for further information).&#13;
Design&#13;
The study was of a correlational design, investigating the relationship between the following continuous variables: the quality of the sibling relationship, CB displayed by the sibling with ID, attributions of controllability made by participants in respect to their sibling’s behaviour, and participants’ general relational abilities. &#13;
As part of further analysis, the intention was to examine whether there were effects of having a brother/sister with a disability, gender, and birth order (i.e. whether participants were older/younger than their sibling) (all between-subjects factors) on the sibling relationship. &#13;
Materials&#13;
During this study, four self-report questionnaires were administered to all participants: the Positive and Negative Affect Scale (PANAS) (Watson, Clark &amp; Tellegen, 1988) (Appendix A), the Behavioral Problems Inventory (Short Form) (BPI-S) (Rojahn, Matson, Lott, Esbensen, &amp; Smalls, 2001) (Appendix B), the Controllability Beliefs Scale (CBS) (Dagnan, Grant &amp; McDonnell, 2004) (Appendix C), and Social Competence and Close Friendship subscales taken from the Harter Self-Perception Profile for Adolescents (Harter, 2012) (Appendix D). The development and presentation of the questionnaires was done using online Qualtrics software (Qualtrics, Provo, UT). &#13;
The Harter Self-Perception Profile for Adolescents (Harter, 2012) is a multidimensional measure of how young people evaluate their scholastic, social, athletic, and job competencies, as well as physical appearance, romantic appeal, behavioural conduct, and close friendship. However, for the purposes of this study, only the subscales regarding social competence and close friendship were included to detect an individual’s general ability in forming and maintaining relationships with others, which might be a confounding influence on detecting the quality of the sibling relationship. Furthermore, the phrasing of the questionnaire was deemed suitable for both adult and adolescent participants.&#13;
The questions are presented as two clauses (e.g. "Some people know how to make others like them, but…”, and “Some individuals do not know how to make others like them”). Participants are able to select whether each clause is “really true for me” or “less true for me”, though are required to make the one selection out of four options across both clauses that is most self-descriptive. These responses are coded into a 4-point scale, with “1” representing poorer social/friendship abilities, and some items are negatively coded. Sufficient levels of validity and reliability of the Profile have been reported within a range of population groups (e.g. Donnellan, Trzesniewski &amp; Robins, 2015; Rose, Hands, &amp; Larkin, 2012).&#13;
A modified version of the PANAS (Watson et al. 1988) was used to assess participants’ feelings towards their brother/sister with a disability, which were then used to infer the quality of the sibling relationship i.e. greater positive affect would indicate a positive and fulfilling sibling relationship, whilst greater negative affect would indicate poor sibling relationship quality. The PANAS is a self-report questionnaire that consists of two separate scales containing emotion-based items that encapsulate positive and negative affect. Participants were asked to think about their sibling and whether they had felt each emotion towards them, rating this on a 5-point scale to specify how often they feel that emotion, ranging from 1 (very slightly or not at all) to 5 (extremely often). Higher total scores on each scale indicated greater positive/negative affect. “Total negative affect” and “total positive affect” scores were obtained for each participant; whereby higher scores pertain to greater affect.&#13;
The PANAS has been widely utilised to measure variation in affect, and previous research investigating its psychometric properties concludes it to have high reliability and validity across many populations (e.g. Merz, Malcarne, Roesch, Ko, Emerson, et al., 2013; Bakhshipour &amp; Dezhkam, 2006). In this study, certain items of the PANAS were adapted to ensure that they were recognisable to younger participants; for example, “hostile” and “strong” were changed to “angry” and “happy”, respectively. The items “jittery”, “active” and “determined” were excluded as the researcher did not view them as relevant to the sibling relationship. Nevertheless, statistical analysis revealed that internal consistency remained, with the positive and negative affect scales showing high reliability in the current sample, Cronbach’s αnegative=.87; Cronbach’s αpositive=.93.&#13;
The BPI-S (Rojahn et al. 2001) is a psychometrically sound behaviour rating instrument (Rojahn, Rowe, Sharber, Hastings, Matson, et al., 2012; Mascitelli, Rojahn Nicolaides, Moore, Hastings et al., 2015) constituting a series of items referencing examples of CB. When completing the BPI-S, respondents consider whether a specific individual (in this study, participants’ sibling) engages in a behaviour, and then rate its frequency on a 1-to-6-point scale; corresponding to responses ranging from “never” to “daily”. The original BPI-S also contains a severity-rating subscale; however, this was excluded from the study, as rating the severity of behaviour was deemed to be too complicated for younger participants to judge. &#13;
The BPI-S contains questions relating to three types of problem behaviours: self-injurious, stereotypic, and aggressive/destructive behaviours. For the purposes of this study, the behavioural items of the BPI-S were grouped and scored according to whether they constituted IDB (i.e. self-injury) or EDBs (i.e. aggression and destruction). Items referencing stereotyped behaviour were excluded, as it was not possible to neatly categorise them into IDB or EDB. As an addition to the questions of the BPI-S, an opportunity for “free text” was included immediately after, whereby participants could describe any behaviours of concern that were not specified by the questionnaire and rate their frequency. Total scores for the BPI-S were obtained, as well as separate total scores for IDB and EDB frequency, whereby higher scores represent a greater number of incidences of CBs.&#13;
Lastly, the CBS (Dagnan et al., 2004) is a 15-item measure designed to capture participants’ perceptions regarding an individual’s (in this case, their siblings’) control over their CB. Responses are scored on a 1-to 5-point scale, corresponding to ‘disagree strongly’, ‘disagree slightly’, ‘unsure’, ‘agree slightly’ and ‘agree strongly’. Ten items are worded such that agreement reflects participants attributing high control over behaviour (e.g. ‘They are trying to wind me up’). In contrast, five items are phrased whereby agreement indicates participants attributing low control over behaviour (e.g. ‘They don’t mean to upset people’); thus, these items are reversed scored. A “total CBS” score was calculated for each participant, with higher scores pertaining to perceptions of greater control over behaviour. Moreover, Dagnan et al. (2004) report good internal reliability, with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.89.&#13;
Demographic information relating to participants’ age, gender, birth order (i.e. were they older/younger than their sibling) and the diagnosis of their disabled sibling (if their brother/sister was disabled) was collected prior to participants completing the questionnaires.  &#13;
Procedure&#13;
After receiving expressions of interest from prospective participants and confirming they had a sibling (with or without an ID), the researcher issued a participant information sheet detailing the nature and aims of the study. Both groups of siblings followed the same study procedure but received participant information sheets that were relevant to their role in the study. The researcher also provided a weblink to the online consent form hosted by Qualtrics. Once participants completed the consent form, they answered demographic questions and generated a participant code to ensure anonymity of responses. Participants were informed prior to the study commencing that they could withdraw at any time, either by closing the webpage or by contacting the researcher and asking to be removed from the dataset.&#13;
Initially, participants responded to items of the Close Friendship and Social Competence subscales of the Harter Self Perception Profile. Following completion of these questions, participants then completed the PANAS, BPI-S and CBS (in that order). Upon finishing the CBS, participants who had a sibling with ID proceeded to a debrief form that outlined the study in detail and provided contact information for support organisations (if needed following discussion of their encounters with CB). Control participants received a debrief form detailing their role in determining the baseline/typical sibling relationship.&#13;
The procedure differed slightly for participants aged under 16 years old. With one exception, who contacted the researcher directly (but ultimately could not participate due to lack of parental consent), this group expressed their desire to participate through their parents contacting the researcher. In response, the researcher sent a consent form for a parent/guardian to complete, giving their permission for their child to participate in the study. Two participant information sheets were also provided; one for parents and another simplified version of the adult participant information sheet for individuals under 16 years old. Once the researcher had received the completed consent form, the weblink to the study was emailed. It was stressed to parents that, though they may wish to support their child in understanding the questions of the study, they should refrain from guiding their child’s answers.&#13;
After clicking the weblink, younger participants completed an assent form and were informed about the participation withdrawal procedures, if required. The presentation of the questionnaires was the same as for those aged 16 years old and above. However, the debrief form was simplified in its language and content to ensure it was accessible to younger participants. Contact information for organisations who could support this group of participants specifically was also provided. Additionally, younger participants with a non-disabled sibling received a simplified version of the adult participant debrief form relevant to their role in the study. After reading the debrief sheet, all participants were given the opportunity to enter into a prize draw for a £20 Amazon voucher. The study lasted roughly 15-20 minutes. &#13;
All participant information sheets, consent forms and debrief sheets are listed in Appendices E – S. &#13;
&#13;
&#13;
Ethical Considerations&#13;
This study was reviewed and approved by the Psychology Department Research Ethics Committee at Lancaster University.&#13;
The topic of this study revolved around participants’ experiences of CB, which could involve reflection upon sensitive experiences (including those of violence and destructive behaviour) that elicit negative psychological reactions (such emotional upset, worry, stress, and shame). Furthermore, the minimum age specified for participants is 12 years old, so some participants recruited would be minors (i.e. a vulnerable participant group).&#13;
In case the discussion of CB experiences elicited negative psychological reactions in participants, contact information for sources of wellbeing support was given as part of the study debrief for both young and adult participants (e.g., talking to a trusted family member or a teacher; information and contact details for free services such as Childline, the Samaritans, The CB Foundation etc.). Offering access to support services was particularly important to younger participants, who may not feel able to speak to their parents about any issues they have.&#13;
Furthermore, consent was required from all participants over the age of 16. If a participant indicated being under the age of 16, consent was sought from a parent/guardian, whilst assent was obtained from all 12-to-15-year-old participants. Consent and assent were monitored throughout the study. All participants were given sufficient opportunity to understand the nature, aims and expected outcomes of research participation. Complex technical information was suitably adapted so that participants aged under 16 years old could give consent to the extent that their capabilities allowed. &#13;
</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="45">
            <name>Publisher</name>
            <description>An entity responsible for making the resource available</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1839">
                <text>Lancaster University</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="42">
            <name>Format</name>
            <description>The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1840">
                <text>Data/SPSS.sav</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="43">
            <name>Identifier</name>
            <description>An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1841">
                <text>LaverickBrown2018</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="37">
            <name>Contributor</name>
            <description>An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1842">
                <text>Rebecca James</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="47">
            <name>Rights</name>
            <description>Information about rights held in and over the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1843">
                <text>Open</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="46">
            <name>Relation</name>
            <description>A related resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1844">
                <text>None</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="44">
            <name>Language</name>
            <description>A language of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1845">
                <text>English</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="51">
            <name>Type</name>
            <description>The nature or genre of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1846">
                <text>Data</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="38">
            <name>Coverage</name>
            <description>The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1847">
                <text>LA1 4YF</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
      <elementSet elementSetId="4">
        <name>LUSTRE</name>
        <description>Adds LUSTRE specific project information</description>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="52">
            <name>Supervisor</name>
            <description>Name of the project supervisor</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1848">
                <text>Chris Walton</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="53">
            <name>Project Level</name>
            <description>Project levels should be entered as UG or MSC</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1849">
                <text>MSc</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="54">
            <name>Topic</name>
            <description>Should contain the sub-category of Psychology the project falls under</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1850">
                <text>Clinical</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="56">
            <name>Sample Size</name>
            <description/>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1851">
                <text>Seventy-four typically developing individuals</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="55">
            <name>Statistical Analysis Type</name>
            <description>The type of statistical analysis used in the project</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="1852">
                <text>None</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
    </elementSetContainer>
  </item>
  <item itemId="101" public="1" featured="0">
    <fileContainer>
      <file fileId="61">
        <src>https://johnntowse.com/LUSTRE/files/original/6c55c906e89c158df6d48b7c80a1fc2b.pdf</src>
        <authentication>ed2fe5669f2c0eaba484d72e312d7831</authentication>
      </file>
    </fileContainer>
    <collection collectionId="10">
      <elementSetContainer>
        <elementSet elementSetId="1">
          <name>Dublin Core</name>
          <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/.</description>
          <elementContainer>
            <element elementId="50">
              <name>Title</name>
              <description>A name given to the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="819">
                  <text>Interviews</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
          </elementContainer>
        </elementSet>
      </elementSetContainer>
    </collection>
    <elementSetContainer>
      <elementSet elementSetId="1">
        <name>Dublin Core</name>
        <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/.</description>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="50">
            <name>Title</name>
            <description>A name given to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2296">
                <text>Does Advertising Truly Represent the LGBTQ+ Community? An Analysis of Intersectionality and Consumer Responses to LGBTQ+ Advertising </text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="39">
            <name>Creator</name>
            <description>An entity primarily responsible for making the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2297">
                <text>Layton Edgington</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="40">
            <name>Date</name>
            <description>A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2298">
                <text>September 2021</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="41">
            <name>Description</name>
            <description>An account of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2299">
                <text>Depictions of sexual and gender minorities in advertising are becoming increasingly common and diverse. Yet, numerous intersections within these portrayals are still invisible. Previous research has found mixed results regarding consumer responses to LGBTQ+ identities in advertising. The current study aimed to obtain a further understanding into how a diverse range of consumers respond to heteronormative versus LGBTQ+ imagery in ads. This was assessed using semi-structured interviews to examine sexual and gender minority consumer (n = 13) and non-LGBTQ+ consumer (n = 6) reactions to three distinct IKEA ads. In addition to this, LGBTQ+ character depictions in 286 worldwide mainstream ads from 2016-2020 were analysed for measures of intersectionality across the dimensions of race, age and specific LGBTQ+ membership, extending the previous findings of Nölke (2018). Results indicated that non-LGBTQ+ participants showed similar responses and subsequent brand evaluation regardless of ad theme. Sexual and gender minority participants were found to show preference towards the ad featuring LGBTQ+ identities, though were often found to be sceptical of such portrayals. Intersectionality analysis uncovered that 47 out of a possible 96 intersections were completely invisible from 2016-2020, although representation of minorities within the community has increased substantially since the original findings. Results demonstrate the importance of character depictions in advertising, highlighting why intersectionality of such portrayals needs to increase in the future. Findings further denote how and why different consumers react to specific ad imagery, making recommendations to marketers regarding their inclusion of LGBTQ+ identities in advertising.</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="49">
            <name>Subject</name>
            <description>The topic of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2300">
                <text>LGBTQ+ advertising, prosocial advertising, intersectionality, consumer attitudes</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="48">
            <name>Source</name>
            <description>A related resource from which the described resource is derived</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2301">
                <text>Participants&#13;
&#13;
The sample consisted of 19 participants aged between 18-53 at their time of interview; Mage = 23.5 years, SDage = 7.6. Of this sample, 13 participants stated that they identified as LGBTQ+ (2 White lesbian females, 1 Mixed-Race lesbian female, 2 White gay males, 1 Asian gay male, 2 White bisexual females, 1 Black bisexual female, 1 Asian bisexual male, 1 White transgender female, 1 White transgender male and 1 White transgender non-binary individual). A further 6 participants stated that they did not identify as LGBTQ+ (3 White males and 3 White females). Participants were recruited in a purposive manner through social media sites such as Instagram and WhatsApp and comprised mainly of acquaintances of the researcher. A high proportion of LGBTQ+ participants were utilised in an effort to ensure intersectionality of responses, which has been shown to provide a strong methodological framework within which to investigate underrepresented groups (Rodriguez, 2018).&#13;
&#13;
Design&#13;
&#13;
The study consisted of two distinct elements; semi-structured interviews and a content analysis of existing global advertisements that feature LGBTQ+ characters from 2016-2020. Semi-structured interviews were the chosen method of qualitative data gathering, as the style allows for analysis according to the basis of grounded theory (Glaser &amp; Strauss, 1967) and gives scope for probing questions to supplement the richness of answers given. The combination of quantitative (quantified content analysis) and qualitative research employed in the study through separate investigations was undertaken in attempt to provide a rigorous understanding of LGBTQ+ diversity in advertising and its effects upon observers. &#13;
&#13;
Interviews	&#13;
All participants individually took part in an in-depth semi-structured interview with the researcher over Microsoft Teams. Due to the inductive nature of the exploration, no independent and dependent variables were implemented. The research broadly assessed the following measures across populations in the sample: the importance of character depictions, prosociality views, representation significance, brand attitudes, and purchasing likelihood succeeding exposure to three IKEA advertisements. The same brand was used for all ads in order to eliminate brand biases. The order in which advertisements were shown to participants was random in an effort to counterbalance order effects. Each interview lasted for approximately 45 minutes. &#13;
&#13;
Ad Intersectionality&#13;
This additional component of the study involved conducting a content analysis of all global advertisements that feature LGBTQ+ identities from 2016-2020. This design mirrored that initially used by Nölke (2018), continuing their longitudinal analysis of intersectionality in LGBTQ+ advertising depictions which scoped the years 2009-2015. Identical to the original study, the source for these ads was AdRespect (http://adrespect.org), a website which comprehensively includes any advertisement featuring LGBTQ+ inclusion from around the world. The independent variable was time, as adverts which aired within each individual year were grouped together. Dependent measures included counts of different intersectionality measures, an approach first used by Gopaldas &amp; DeRoy (2015) in their intersectional analysis of Gentlemen’s Quarterly covers, and were further investigated by Nölke (2018). In the present study these measures consisted of age, race and specific LGBTQ+ membership.&#13;
&#13;
Measures&#13;
&#13;
Interviews&#13;
The semi-structured interview completed by each participant was devised entirely by the researcher and involved seven different sections which addressed questions surrounding the significance of character portrayals in advertising. The interview primarily consisted of open-ended questions, though some close-ended questions were also asked where definitive answers were required. Questions often had multiple sub-questions within them in order to probe more detailed responses from participants. In total the interview asked 31 unique questions, with nine of these questions repeated three times (in sections four, five and six).&#13;
The first section was an overview which told participants what the interview would entail whilst it also asked general ad watching questions to prime the interviewee for more detailed questions to follow. An example question from section one includes “would you say in general that you watch many ads?”. &#13;
Section two was focused on the participant’s views towards representation in advertising, particularly focusing on LGBTQ+ representation and its significance to them. Example questions include: “if you are to view an advertisement that openly features LGBTQ+ identities, how would it make you feel?” and “do the character depictions in adverts matter to you? What characteristic(s) are most significant to you? Why is this?”.&#13;
The third section addressed identity formation, asking interviewees questions about advertising from when they were growing up in an attempt to investigate the impact of negligible LGBTQ+ depictions in the past. It asked questions including: “Do you ever remember seeing LGBTQ+ identities in advertising when you were younger? How did this make you feel?”. In addition to this, it attempted to gain an understanding of how characters in advertising impact the formation of identity from a retrospective viewpoint. &#13;
The subsequent three sections all asked the same set of questions to participants after showing them three different IKEA adverts in a random order (https://bit.ly/2VkBCQs), (https://bit.ly/3yHXouV) and (https://bit.ly/2WVyElD). All ads were published to mainstream audiences on television by IKEA within the past two years and were matched closely in terms of length. The first ad (Ads of Brands, 2020) titled ‘next generation’ featured only heteronormative White characters, within a nuclear family unit. It was selected as it acted as a non-representative example which showcased very little intersectionality and no LGBTQ+ identities. The second ad ‘change a bit for good’ (IKEA UK, 2021) displayed identity neutral robots who attempt to tackle climate change. This ad acted as a control for participants, as it still addresses a prosocial topic whilst portraying no identifying elements of its characters. The final ad ‘be someone’s home’ (IKEA USA, 2020) showed a wide variety of diversity across intersections within the LGBTQ+ community, which functioned as an inclusive example to interviewees.&#13;
Questions asked after exposure to each ad included items assessing the participant’s attitude towards the brand, their subsequent purchasing intentions and the believed importance of the identities portrayed. Example items include: “after watching this ad, would you feel more or less inclined to spend money with IKEA? Why is this?” and “do you believe the identities shown in the ad are important to others? Why do you think this?”.&#13;
The last component of the interview asked participants about their general spending behaviour, brand evaluation and concluding questions about how LGBTQ+ visibility in  advertising makes them feel. Sample items include: “would seeing an ad that positively depicts someone similar to you make you value the brand more? How come? Would this also make you more likely to buy?” and “is there anything that you would like to change in modern advertising? Less of something? More of something? Why?”.&#13;
&#13;
Ad Intersectionality&#13;
Coding Scheme. The present study followed the coding scheme of Nölke (2018), but chose to exclude class as a coding dimension, due to an absence of representation in this area. The coding dimensions analysed within the study were LGBTQ+ membership, age and race. Each portrayal was coded across all three dimensions.&#13;
LGBTQ+ Membership. Items within this dimension were coded accordingly: ‘lesbian female’, ‘gay male’, ‘bisexual’, ‘trans-female’ (MtF) which included drag queens, ‘trans-male’ (FtM) and ‘gender neutral/non-binary’. Nölke (2018) did not code gender neutral or non-binary identities due to the absence of such portrayals. The current study implemented this additional measure as it saw the need to recognise the additional membership which is becoming increasingly prevalent in modern depictions. Transgender depictions were either explicitly labelled as such within the ad, overtly presented (for example, in terms of top-surgery scarring) or for celebrity depictions, publicly accessible data on their identity was used. Gender neutral/non-binary coded characters were either stated as such within the ad, their gender was indiscernible, or in celebrity cases, publicly available information on their identity was again utilised.&#13;
Age. Based upon Gopaldas &amp; DeRoy’s (2015) scheme, age was determined by estimations to the nearest multiple of five based upon observation. The following codes were used: “teen” (aged 13+), “young adult” (20+), “middle-aged” (35+) and “mature” (50+). &#13;
Race. The race of characters was coded according to visual appearance, language and ad text. Codes included “White”, “Black”, “Asian” and “Latinx”. It is important to note that these terms differ from those used by Nölke (2018), in accordance to APA’s guidance on inclusive language regarding racial and ethnic identity (American Psychological Association, 2019).&#13;
&#13;
Procedure&#13;
Ethical approval for this study was acquired through the project supervisor and ethics partner at Lancaster University, as the proposed research was deemed low risk.&#13;
&#13;
Interviews&#13;
Participants were each given an electronic information sheet, consent form and short demographic questionnaire which included LGBTQ+ membership status questions to complete through Qualtrics (https://www.qualtrics.com). To ensure participants were comfortable, all questions in this form were optional to answer. After consent was obtained, participants were contacted to arrange a suitable interview date and time, which was conducted via Microsoft Teams. During each interview, the researcher asked questions according to the interview schedule in a semi-structured manner. These interviews were recorded and transcribed for analysis. Throughout the interviews, participants were reminded that they did not need to answer any questions that they did not want to and that they were free to leave at any point should they wish. Any identifying data was removed during transcription to maintain participant confidentiality. After interviews had finished, all participants were sent a debriefing form via email.&#13;
&#13;
Ad Intersectionality&#13;
Ad Selection. Ads published between 2016-2020 on AdRespect were selected according to the same principles utilised by Nölke (2018). To begin, the 531 ads submitted to AdRespect during the years 2016-2020 were evaluated. AdRespect states the audience in which each ad was published to and those that were exclusively published to LGBTQ+ audiences were excluded from analysis. Additionally rejected from analysis were ads where the character’s LGBTQ+ status was not evident, ads that showed no explicit depiction of people and ads for non-profit organisations. This exclusion criteria left 284 ads. As AdRespect is a crowdsourced platform, a further search for ads that met the inclusion criteria was conducted across the internet in case any were left out by the online database. This search found a further two ads, producing a total of 286 ads within the final dataset. These ads were then coded according to the dimensions of age, race and LGBTQ+ membership. Ads were coded for every LGBTQ+ portrayal shown, thus often multiple characters were displayed within each ad and were analysed per individual depiction.&#13;
&#13;
Analysis&#13;
&#13;
Qualitative Analysis of Interviews&#13;
After transcription, all interviews were analysed through inductive thematic analysis due to the exploratory nature of the research (Braun &amp; Clarke, 2006). This process adhered to their six phases of analysis: familiarization of the data, initial code generation, theme search, theme review, defining and naming themes and report production, which allowed the researcher to identify the themes that underpin consumer responses and attitudes towards LGBTQ+ portrayals. This analysis was conducted through NVivo 12 qualitative data analysis software. &#13;
&#13;
Quantitative Analysis of ad Intersectionality &#13;
Quantitative analyses of the dataset were conducted through collation of codes ascribed to portrayals across time. The depictions were summarised across intersectional and unidimensional measures according to which year they belonged to. This was analysed as a singular project as well as comparatively against the original findings from Nölke (2018), which allowed to researcher to demonstrate how portrayals of the LGBTQ+ community in advertising have transformed from 2009-2020. In addition to the researcher, a secondary coder was randomly assigned 25 ads from the dataset in order to test inter-rater reliability, which stood at 100% across all coding dimensions.&#13;
&#13;
&#13;
</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="45">
            <name>Publisher</name>
            <description>An entity responsible for making the resource available</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2302">
                <text>Lancaster University</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="42">
            <name>Format</name>
            <description>The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2303">
                <text>Data/Excel.csv&#13;
Text/Nvivo&#13;
</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="43">
            <name>Identifier</name>
            <description>An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2304">
                <text>Edgington2021</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="37">
            <name>Contributor</name>
            <description>An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2305">
                <text>Layton Edgington</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="47">
            <name>Rights</name>
            <description>Information about rights held in and over the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2306">
                <text>Open</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="46">
            <name>Relation</name>
            <description>A related resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2307">
                <text>Qualitative analysis has no relation. Content analysis extends the work of Nölke (2018). Nölke, A. I. (2018). Making diversity conform? An intersectional, longitudinal analysis of LGBT-specific mainstream media advertisements. Journal of Homosexuality, 65(2), 224-255.</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="44">
            <name>Language</name>
            <description>A language of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2308">
                <text>English</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="51">
            <name>Type</name>
            <description>The nature or genre of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2309">
                <text>Data and text</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="38">
            <name>Coverage</name>
            <description>The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2310">
                <text>LA1 4YF</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
      <elementSet elementSetId="4">
        <name>LUSTRE</name>
        <description>Adds LUSTRE specific project information</description>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="52">
            <name>Supervisor</name>
            <description>Name of the project supervisor</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2311">
                <text>Leslie Hallam</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="53">
            <name>Project Level</name>
            <description>Project levels should be entered as UG or MSC</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2312">
                <text>MSc</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="54">
            <name>Topic</name>
            <description>Should contain the sub-category of Psychology the project falls under</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2313">
                <text>Marketing, Social</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="56">
            <name>Sample Size</name>
            <description/>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2314">
                <text>Qualitative: 19 participants took part in interviews (13 LGBTQ+ identifying and 6 non-LGBTQ+). Quantitative: content analysis sample consisted of 286 ads.</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="55">
            <name>Statistical Analysis Type</name>
            <description>The type of statistical analysis used in the project</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2315">
                <text>Qualitative, Qualitative (Thematic Analysis), Content Analysis</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
    </elementSetContainer>
  </item>
  <item itemId="131" public="1" featured="0">
    <fileContainer>
      <file fileId="128">
        <src>https://johnntowse.com/LUSTRE/files/original/108cecf7f7179778b4560e89499d451a.pdf</src>
        <authentication>ed2fe5669f2c0eaba484d72e312d7831</authentication>
      </file>
    </fileContainer>
    <collection collectionId="10">
      <elementSetContainer>
        <elementSet elementSetId="1">
          <name>Dublin Core</name>
          <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/.</description>
          <elementContainer>
            <element elementId="50">
              <name>Title</name>
              <description>A name given to the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="819">
                  <text>Interviews</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
          </elementContainer>
        </elementSet>
      </elementSetContainer>
    </collection>
    <elementSetContainer>
      <elementSet elementSetId="1">
        <name>Dublin Core</name>
        <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/.</description>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="50">
            <name>Title</name>
            <description>A name given to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2789">
                <text>Does Advertising Truly Represent the LGBTQ+ Community? An Analysis of Intersectionality and Consumer Responses to LGBTQ+ Advertising </text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="39">
            <name>Creator</name>
            <description>An entity primarily responsible for making the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2790">
                <text>Layton Edgington</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="40">
            <name>Date</name>
            <description>A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2791">
                <text>September 2021</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="41">
            <name>Description</name>
            <description>An account of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2792">
                <text>Depictions of sexual and gender minorities in advertising are becoming increasingly common and diverse. Yet, numerous intersections within these portrayals are still invisible. Previous research has found mixed results regarding consumer responses to LGBTQ+ identities in advertising. The current study aimed to obtain a further understanding into how a diverse range of consumers respond to heteronormative versus LGBTQ+ imagery in ads. This was assessed using semi-structured interviews to examine sexual and gender minority consumer (n = 13) and non-LGBTQ+ consumer (n = 6) reactions to three distinct IKEA ads. In addition to this, LGBTQ+ character depictions in 286 worldwide mainstream ads from 2016-2020 were analysed for measures of intersectionality across the dimensions of race, age and specific LGBTQ+ membership, extending the previous findings of Nölke (2018). Results indicated that non-LGBTQ+ participants showed similar responses and subsequent brand evaluation regardless of ad theme. Sexual and gender minority participants were found to show preference towards the ad featuring LGBTQ+ identities, though were often found to be sceptical of such portrayals. Intersectionality analysis uncovered that 47 out of a possible 96 intersections were completely invisible from 2016-2020, although representation of minorities within the community has increased substantially since the original findings. Results demonstrate the importance of character depictions in advertising, highlighting why intersectionality of such portrayals needs to increase in the future. Findings further denote how and why different consumers react to specific ad imagery, making recommendations to marketers regarding their inclusion of LGBTQ+ identities in advertising. </text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="49">
            <name>Subject</name>
            <description>The topic of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2793">
                <text>LGBTQ+ advertising, prosocial advertising, intersectionality, consumer attitudes</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="48">
            <name>Source</name>
            <description>A related resource from which the described resource is derived</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2794">
                <text>Participants&#13;
The sample consisted of 19 participants aged between 18-53 at their time of interview; Mage = 23.5 years, SDage = 7.6. Of this sample, 13 participants stated that they identified as LGBTQ+ (2 White lesbian females, 1 Mixed-Race lesbian female, 2 White gay males, 1 Asian gay male, 2 White bisexual females, 1 Black bisexual female, 1 Asian bisexual male, 1 White transgender female, 1 White transgender male and 1 White transgender non-binary individual). A further 6 participants stated that they did not identify as LGBTQ+ (3 White males and 3 White females). Participants were recruited in a purposive manner through social media sites such as Instagram and WhatsApp and comprised mainly of acquaintances of the researcher. A high proportion of LGBTQ+ participants were utilised in an effort to ensure intersectionality of responses, which has been shown to provide a strong methodological framework within which to investigate underrepresented groups (Rodriguez, 2018).&#13;
&#13;
Design&#13;
The study consisted of two distinct elements; semi-structured interviews and a content analysis of existing global advertisements that feature LGBTQ+ characters from 2016-2020. Semi-structured interviews were the chosen method of qualitative data gathering, as the style allows for analysis according to the basis of grounded theory (Glaser &amp; Strauss, 1967) and gives scope for probing questions to supplement the richness of answers given. The combination of quantitative (quantified content analysis) and qualitative research employed in the study through separate investigations was undertaken in attempt to provide a rigorous understanding of LGBTQ+ diversity in advertising and its effects upon observers. &#13;
&#13;
Interviews	&#13;
All participants individually took part in an in-depth semi-structured interview with the researcher over Microsoft Teams. Due to the inductive nature of the exploration, no independent and dependent variables were implemented. The research broadly assessed the following measures across populations in the sample: the importance of character depictions, prosociality views, representation significance, brand attitudes, and purchasing likelihood succeeding exposure to three IKEA advertisements. The same brand was used for all ads in order to eliminate brand biases. The order in which advertisements were shown to participants was random in an effort to counterbalance order effects. Each interview lasted for approximately 45 minutes. &#13;
&#13;
Ad Intersectionality&#13;
This additional component of the study involved conducting a content analysis of all global advertisements that feature LGBTQ+ identities from 2016-2020. This design mirrored that initially used by Nölke (2018), continuing their longitudinal analysis of intersectionality in LGBTQ+ advertising depictions which scoped the years 2009-2015. Identical to the original study, the source for these ads was AdRespect (http://adrespect.org), a website which comprehensively includes any advertisement featuring LGBTQ+ inclusion from around the world. The independent variable was time, as adverts which aired within each individual year were grouped together. Dependent measures included counts of different intersectionality measures, an approach first used by Gopaldas &amp; DeRoy (2015) in their intersectional analysis of Gentlemen’s Quarterly covers, and were further investigated by Nölke (2018). In the present study these measures consisted of age, race and specific LGBTQ+ membership.&#13;
&#13;
Measures&#13;
&#13;
Interviews&#13;
The semi-structured interview completed by each participant was devised entirely by the researcher and involved seven different sections which addressed questions surrounding the significance of character portrayals in advertising. The interview primarily consisted of open-ended questions, though some close-ended questions were also asked where definitive answers were required. Questions often had multiple sub-questions within them in order to probe more detailed responses from participants. In total the interview asked 31 unique questions, with nine of these questions repeated three times (in sections four, five and six).&#13;
The first section was an overview which told participants what the interview would entail whilst it also asked general ad watching questions to prime the interviewee for more detailed questions to follow. An example question from section one includes “would you say in general that you watch many ads?”. &#13;
Section two was focused on the participant’s views towards representation in advertising, particularly focusing on LGBTQ+ representation and its significance to them. Example questions include: “if you are to view an advertisement that openly features LGBTQ+ identities, how would it make you feel?” and “do the character depictions in adverts matter to you? What characteristic(s) are most significant to you? Why is this?”.&#13;
The third section addressed identity formation, asking interviewees questions about advertising from when they were growing up in an attempt to investigate the impact of negligible LGBTQ+ depictions in the past. It asked questions including: “Do you ever remember seeing LGBTQ+ identities in advertising when you were younger? How did this make you feel?”. In addition to this, it attempted to gain an understanding of how characters in advertising impact the formation of identity from a retrospective viewpoint. &#13;
The subsequent three sections all asked the same set of questions to participants after showing them three different IKEA adverts in a random order (https://bit.ly/2VkBCQs), (https://bit.ly/3yHXouV) and (https://bit.ly/2WVyElD). All ads were published to mainstream audiences on television by IKEA within the past two years and were matched closely in terms of length. The first ad (Ads of Brands, 2020) titled ‘next generation’ featured only heteronormative White characters, within a nuclear family unit. It was selected as it acted as a non-representative example which showcased very little intersectionality and no LGBTQ+ identities. The second ad ‘change a bit for good’ (IKEA UK, 2021) displayed identity neutral robots who attempt to tackle climate change. This ad acted as a control for participants, as it still addresses a prosocial topic whilst portraying no identifying elements of its characters. The final ad ‘be someone’s home’ (IKEA USA, 2020) showed a wide variety of diversity across intersections within the LGBTQ+ community, which functioned as an inclusive example to interviewees.&#13;
Questions asked after exposure to each ad included items assessing the participant’s attitude towards the brand, their subsequent purchasing intentions and the believed importance of the identities portrayed. Example items include: “after watching this ad, would you feel more or less inclined to spend money with IKEA? Why is this?” and “do you believe the identities shown in the ad are important to others? Why do you think this?”.&#13;
The last component of the interview asked participants about their general spending behaviour, brand evaluation and concluding questions about how LGBTQ+ visibility in  advertising makes them feel. Sample items include: “would seeing an ad that positively depicts someone similar to you make you value the brand more? How come? Would this also make you more likely to buy?” and “is there anything that you would like to change in modern advertising? Less of something? More of something? Why?”.&#13;
&#13;
Ad Intersectionality&#13;
Coding Scheme. The present study followed the coding scheme of Nölke (2018), but chose to exclude class as a coding dimension, due to an absence of representation in this area. The coding dimensions analysed within the study were LGBTQ+ membership, age and race. Each portrayal was coded across all three dimensions.&#13;
LGBTQ+ Membership. Items within this dimension were coded accordingly: ‘lesbian female’, ‘gay male’, ‘bisexual’, ‘trans-female’ (MtF) which included drag queens, ‘trans-male’ (FtM) and ‘gender neutral/non-binary’. Nölke (2018) did not code gender neutral or non-binary identities due to the absence of such portrayals. The current study implemented this additional measure as it saw the need to recognise the additional membership which is becoming increasingly prevalent in modern depictions. Transgender depictions were either explicitly labelled as such within the ad, overtly presented (for example, in terms of top-surgery scarring) or for celebrity depictions, publicly accessible data on their identity was used. Gender neutral/non-binary coded characters were either stated as such within the ad, their gender was indiscernible, or in celebrity cases, publicly available information on their identity was again utilised.&#13;
&#13;
Age. Based upon Gopaldas &amp; DeRoy’s (2015) scheme, age was determined by estimations to the nearest multiple of five based upon observation. The following codes were used: “teen” (aged 13+), “young adult” (20+), “middle-aged” (35+) and “mature” (50+). &#13;
&#13;
Race. The race of characters was coded according to visual appearance, language and ad text. Codes included “White”, “Black”, “Asian” and “Latinx”. It is important to note that these terms differ from those used by Nölke (2018), in accordance to APA’s guidance on inclusive language regarding racial and ethnic identity (American Psychological Association, 2019).&#13;
&#13;
Procedure&#13;
Ethical approval for this study was acquired through the project supervisor and ethics partner at Lancaster University, as the proposed research was deemed low risk.&#13;
&#13;
Interviews&#13;
Participants were each given an electronic information sheet, consent form and short demographic questionnaire which included LGBTQ+ membership status questions to complete through Qualtrics (https://www.qualtrics.com). To ensure participants were comfortable, all questions in this form were optional to answer. After consent was obtained, participants were contacted to arrange a suitable interview date and time, which was conducted via Microsoft Teams. During each interview, the researcher asked questions according to the interview schedule in a semi-structured manner. These interviews were recorded and transcribed for analysis. Throughout the interviews, participants were reminded that they did not need to answer any questions that they did not want to and that they were free to leave at any point should they wish. Any identifying data was removed during transcription to maintain participant confidentiality. After interviews had finished, all participants were sent a debriefing form via email.&#13;
&#13;
Ad Intersectionality&#13;
Ad Selection. Ads published between 2016-2020 on AdRespect were selected according to the same principles utilised by Nölke (2018). To begin, the 531 ads submitted to AdRespect during the years 2016-2020 were evaluated. AdRespect states the audience in which each ad was published to and those that were exclusively published to LGBTQ+ audiences were excluded from analysis. Additionally rejected from analysis were ads where the character’s LGBTQ+ status was not evident, ads that showed no explicit depiction of people and ads for non-profit organisations. This exclusion criteria left 284 ads. As AdRespect is a crowdsourced platform, a further search for ads that met the inclusion criteria was conducted across the internet in case any were left out by the online database. This search found a further two ads, producing a total of 286 ads within the final dataset. These ads were then coded according to the dimensions of age, race and LGBTQ+ membership. Ads were coded for every LGBTQ+ portrayal shown, thus often multiple characters were displayed within each ad and were analysed per individual depiction.&#13;
&#13;
Analysis&#13;
&#13;
Qualitative Analysis of Interviews&#13;
After transcription, all interviews were analysed through inductive thematic analysis due to the exploratory nature of the research (Braun &amp; Clarke, 2006). This process adhered to their six phases of analysis: familiarization of the data, initial code generation, theme search, theme review, defining and naming themes and report production, which allowed the researcher to identify the themes that underpin consumer responses and attitudes towards LGBTQ+ portrayals. This analysis was conducted through NVivo 12 qualitative data analysis software.&#13;
 &#13;
Quantitative Analysis of ad Intersectionality &#13;
Quantitative analyses of the dataset were conducted through collation of codes ascribed to portrayals across time. The depictions were summarised across intersectional and unidimensional measures according to which year they belonged to. This was analysed as a singular project as well as comparatively against the original findings from Nölke (2018), which allowed to researcher to demonstrate how portrayals of the LGBTQ+ community in advertising have transformed from 2009-2020. In addition to the researcher, a secondary coder was randomly assigned 25 ads from the dataset in order to test inter-rater reliability, which stood at 100% across all coding dimensions.&#13;
</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="45">
            <name>Publisher</name>
            <description>An entity responsible for making the resource available</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2795">
                <text>Lancaster University</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="42">
            <name>Format</name>
            <description>The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2796">
                <text>Data/Excel.csv&#13;
Text/Nvivo</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="43">
            <name>Identifier</name>
            <description>An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2797">
                <text>Edgington2021</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="37">
            <name>Contributor</name>
            <description>An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2798">
                <text>Laura Meek</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="47">
            <name>Rights</name>
            <description>Information about rights held in and over the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2799">
                <text>Open (Unless stated otherwise) </text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="46">
            <name>Relation</name>
            <description>A related resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2800">
                <text>None (Unless stated otherwise)</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="44">
            <name>Language</name>
            <description>A language of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2801">
                <text>English</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="51">
            <name>Type</name>
            <description>The nature or genre of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2802">
                <text>Data</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="38">
            <name>Coverage</name>
            <description>The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2803">
                <text>LA1 4YF</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
      <elementSet elementSetId="4">
        <name>LUSTRE</name>
        <description>Adds LUSTRE specific project information</description>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="52">
            <name>Supervisor</name>
            <description>Name of the project supervisor</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2809">
                <text>Leslie Hallam</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="53">
            <name>Project Level</name>
            <description>Project levels should be entered as UG or MSC</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2810">
                <text>MSc</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="54">
            <name>Topic</name>
            <description>Should contain the sub-category of Psychology the project falls under</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2811">
                <text>Social, Marketing</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="56">
            <name>Sample Size</name>
            <description/>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2812">
                <text>The sample consisted of 19 participants aged; Mage = 23.5 years, SDage = 7.6. Of this sample, 13 participants stated that they identified as LGBTQ+ (2 White lesbian females, 1 Mixed-Race lesbian female, 2 White gay males, 1 Asian gay male, 2 White bisexual females, 1 Black bisexual female, 1 Asian bisexual male, 1 White transgender female, 1 White transgender male and 1 White transgender non-binary individual). A further 6 participants stated that they did not identify as LGBTQ+ (3 White males and 3 White females).</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="55">
            <name>Statistical Analysis Type</name>
            <description>The type of statistical analysis used in the project</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2813">
                <text>Qualitative&#13;
ANOVA</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
    </elementSetContainer>
  </item>
  <item itemId="134" public="1" featured="0">
    <collection collectionId="10">
      <elementSetContainer>
        <elementSet elementSetId="1">
          <name>Dublin Core</name>
          <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/.</description>
          <elementContainer>
            <element elementId="50">
              <name>Title</name>
              <description>A name given to the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="819">
                  <text>Interviews</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
          </elementContainer>
        </elementSet>
      </elementSetContainer>
    </collection>
    <elementSetContainer>
      <elementSet elementSetId="1">
        <name>Dublin Core</name>
        <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/.</description>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="50">
            <name>Title</name>
            <description>A name given to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2814">
                <text>Does Advertising Truly Represent the LGBTQ+ Community? An Analysis of Intersectionality and Consumer Responses to LGBTQ+ Advertising </text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="39">
            <name>Creator</name>
            <description>An entity primarily responsible for making the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2815">
                <text>Layton Edgington</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="40">
            <name>Date</name>
            <description>A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2816">
                <text>September 2021</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="41">
            <name>Description</name>
            <description>An account of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2817">
                <text>Depictions of sexual and gender minorities in advertising are becoming increasingly common and diverse. Yet, numerous intersections within these portrayals are still invisible. Previous research has found mixed results regarding consumer responses to LGBTQ+ identities in advertising. The current study aimed to obtain a further understanding into how a diverse range of consumers respond to heteronormative versus LGBTQ+ imagery in ads. This was assessed using semi-structured interviews to examine sexual and gender minority consumer (n = 13) and non-LGBTQ+ consumer (n = 6) reactions to three distinct IKEA ads. In addition to this, LGBTQ+ character depictions in 286 worldwide mainstream ads from 2016-2020 were analysed for measures of intersectionality across the dimensions of race, age and specific LGBTQ+ membership, extending the previous findings of Nölke (2018). Results indicated that non-LGBTQ+ participants showed similar responses and subsequent brand evaluation regardless of ad theme. Sexual and gender minority participants were found to show preference towards the ad featuring LGBTQ+ identities, though were often found to be sceptical of such portrayals. Intersectionality analysis uncovered that 47 out of a possible 96 intersections were completely invisible from 2016-2020, although representation of minorities within the community has increased substantially since the original findings. Results demonstrate the importance of character depictions in advertising, highlighting why intersectionality of such portrayals needs to increase in the future. Findings further denote how and why different consumers react to specific ad imagery, making recommendations to marketers regarding their inclusion of LGBTQ+ identities in advertising. </text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="49">
            <name>Subject</name>
            <description>The topic of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2818">
                <text>LGBTQ+ advertising, prosocial advertising, intersectionality, consumer attitudes</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="48">
            <name>Source</name>
            <description>A related resource from which the described resource is derived</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2819">
                <text>Participants&#13;
The sample consisted of 19 participants aged between 18-53 at their time of interview; Mage = 23.5 years, SDage = 7.6. Of this sample, 13 participants stated that they identified as LGBTQ+ (2 White lesbian females, 1 Mixed-Race lesbian female, 2 White gay males, 1 Asian gay male, 2 White bisexual females, 1 Black bisexual female, 1 Asian bisexual male, 1 White transgender female, 1 White transgender male and 1 White transgender non-binary individual). A further 6 participants stated that they did not identify as LGBTQ+ (3 White males and 3 White females). Participants were recruited in a purposive manner through social media sites such as Instagram and WhatsApp and comprised mainly of acquaintances of the researcher. A high proportion of LGBTQ+ participants were utilised in an effort to ensure intersectionality of responses, which has been shown to provide a strong methodological framework within which to investigate underrepresented groups (Rodriguez, 2018).&#13;
Design&#13;
The study consisted of two distinct elements; semi-structured interviews and a content analysis of existing global advertisements that feature LGBTQ+ characters from 2016-2020. Semi-structured interviews were the chosen method of qualitative data gathering, as the style allows for analysis according to the basis of grounded theory (Glaser &amp; Strauss, 1967) and gives scope for probing questions to supplement the richness of answers given. The combination of quantitative (quantified content analysis) and qualitative research employed in the study through separate investigations was undertaken in attempt to provide a rigorous understanding of LGBTQ+ diversity in advertising and its effects upon observers. &#13;
Interviews	&#13;
All participants individually took part in an in-depth semi-structured interview with the researcher over Microsoft Teams. Due to the inductive nature of the exploration, no independent and dependent variables were implemented. The research broadly assessed the following measures across populations in the sample: the importance of character depictions, prosociality views, representation significance, brand attitudes, and purchasing likelihood succeeding exposure to three IKEA advertisements. The same brand was used for all ads in order to eliminate brand biases. The order in which advertisements were shown to participants was random in an effort to counterbalance order effects. Each interview lasted for approximately 45 minutes. &#13;
Ad Intersectionality&#13;
This additional component of the study involved conducting a content analysis of all global advertisements that feature LGBTQ+ identities from 2016-2020. This design mirrored that initially used by Nölke (2018), continuing their longitudinal analysis of intersectionality in LGBTQ+ advertising depictions which scoped the years 2009-2015. Identical to the original study, the source for these ads was AdRespect (http://adrespect.org), a website which comprehensively includes any advertisement featuring LGBTQ+ inclusion from around the world. The independent variable was time, as adverts which aired within each individual year were grouped together. Dependent measures included counts of different intersectionality measures, an approach first used by Gopaldas &amp; DeRoy (2015) in their intersectional analysis of Gentlemen’s Quarterly covers, and were further investigated by Nölke (2018). In the present study these measures consisted of age, race and specific LGBTQ+ membership.&#13;
Measures&#13;
Interviews&#13;
The semi-structured interview completed by each participant was devised entirely by the researcher and involved seven different sections which addressed questions surrounding the significance of character portrayals in advertising. The interview primarily consisted of open-ended questions, though some close-ended questions were also asked where definitive answers were required. Questions often had multiple sub-questions within them in order to probe more detailed responses from participants. In total the interview asked 31 unique questions, with nine of these questions repeated three times (in sections four, five and six).&#13;
The first section was an overview which told participants what the interview would entail whilst it also asked general ad watching questions to prime the interviewee for more detailed questions to follow. An example question from section one includes “would you say in general that you watch many ads?”. &#13;
Section two was focused on the participant’s views towards representation in advertising, particularly focusing on LGBTQ+ representation and its significance to them. Example questions include: “if you are to view an advertisement that openly features LGBTQ+ identities, how would it make you feel?” and “do the character depictions in adverts matter to you? What characteristic(s) are most significant to you? Why is this?”.&#13;
The third section addressed identity formation, asking interviewees questions about advertising from when they were growing up in an attempt to investigate the impact of negligible LGBTQ+ depictions in the past. It asked questions including: “Do you ever remember seeing LGBTQ+ identities in advertising when you were younger? How did this make you feel?”. In addition to this, it attempted to gain an understanding of how characters in advertising impact the formation of identity from a retrospective viewpoint. &#13;
The subsequent three sections all asked the same set of questions to participants after showing them three different IKEA adverts in a random order (https://bit.ly/2VkBCQs), (https://bit.ly/3yHXouV) and (https://bit.ly/2WVyElD). All ads were published to mainstream audiences on television by IKEA within the past two years and were matched closely in terms of length. The first ad (Ads of Brands, 2020) titled ‘next generation’ featured only heteronormative White characters, within a nuclear family unit. It was selected as it acted as a non-representative example which showcased very little intersectionality and no LGBTQ+ identities. The second ad ‘change a bit for good’ (IKEA UK, 2021) displayed identity neutral robots who attempt to tackle climate change. This ad acted as a control for participants, as it still addresses a prosocial topic whilst portraying no identifying elements of its characters. The final ad ‘be someone’s home’ (IKEA USA, 2020) showed a wide variety of diversity across intersections within the LGBTQ+ community, which functioned as an inclusive example to interviewees.&#13;
Questions asked after exposure to each ad included items assessing the participant’s attitude towards the brand, their subsequent purchasing intentions and the believed importance of the identities portrayed. Example items include: “after watching this ad, would you feel more or less inclined to spend money with IKEA? Why is this?” and “do you believe the identities shown in the ad are important to others? Why do you think this?”.&#13;
The last component of the interview asked participants about their general spending behaviour, brand evaluation and concluding questions about how LGBTQ+ visibility in  advertising makes them feel. Sample items include: “would seeing an ad that positively depicts someone similar to you make you value the brand more? How come? Would this also make you more likely to buy?” and “is there anything that you would like to change in modern advertising? Less of something? More of something? Why?”.&#13;
Ad Intersectionality&#13;
Coding Scheme. The present study followed the coding scheme of Nölke (2018), but chose to exclude class as a coding dimension, due to an absence of representation in this area. The coding dimensions analysed within the study were LGBTQ+ membership, age and race. Each portrayal was coded across all three dimensions.&#13;
LGBTQ+ Membership. Items within this dimension were coded accordingly: ‘lesbian female’, ‘gay male’, ‘bisexual’, ‘trans-female’ (MtF) which included drag queens, ‘trans-male’ (FtM) and ‘gender neutral/non-binary’. Nölke (2018) did not code gender neutral or non-binary identities due to the absence of such portrayals. The current study implemented this additional measure as it saw the need to recognise the additional membership which is becoming increasingly prevalent in modern depictions. Transgender depictions were either explicitly labelled as such within the ad, overtly presented (for example, in terms of top-surgery scarring) or for celebrity depictions, publicly accessible data on their identity was used. Gender neutral/non-binary coded characters were either stated as such within the ad, their gender was indiscernible, or in celebrity cases, publicly available information on their identity was again utilised.&#13;
Age. Based upon Gopaldas &amp; DeRoy’s (2015) scheme, age was determined by estimations to the nearest multiple of five based upon observation. The following codes were used: “teen” (aged 13+), “young adult” (20+), “middle-aged” (35+) and “mature” (50+). &#13;
Race. The race of characters was coded according to visual appearance, language and ad text. Codes included “White”, “Black”, “Asian” and “Latinx”. It is important to note that these terms differ from those used by Nölke (2018), in accordance to APA’s guidance on inclusive language regarding racial and ethnic identity (American Psychological Association, 2019).&#13;
Procedure&#13;
Ethical approval for this study was acquired through the project supervisor and ethics partner at Lancaster University, as the proposed research was deemed low risk.&#13;
Interviews&#13;
Participants were each given an electronic information sheet, consent form and short demographic questionnaire which included LGBTQ+ membership status questions to complete through Qualtrics (https://www.qualtrics.com). To ensure participants were comfortable, all questions in this form were optional to answer. After consent was obtained, participants were contacted to arrange a suitable interview date and time, which was conducted via Microsoft Teams. During each interview, the researcher asked questions according to the interview schedule in a semi-structured manner. These interviews were recorded and transcribed for analysis. Throughout the interviews, participants were reminded that they did not need to answer any questions that they did not want to and that they were free to leave at any point should they wish. Any identifying data was removed during transcription to maintain participant confidentiality. After interviews had finished, all participants were sent a debriefing form via email.&#13;
Ad Intersectionality&#13;
Ad Selection. Ads published between 2016-2020 on AdRespect were selected according to the same principles utilised by Nölke (2018). To begin, the 531 ads submitted to AdRespect during the years 2016-2020 were evaluated. AdRespect states the audience in which each ad was published to and those that were exclusively published to LGBTQ+ audiences were excluded from analysis. Additionally rejected from analysis were ads where the character’s LGBTQ+ status was not evident, ads that showed no explicit depiction of people and ads for non-profit organisations. This exclusion criteria left 284 ads. As AdRespect is a crowdsourced platform, a further search for ads that met the inclusion criteria was conducted across the internet in case any were left out by the online database. This search found a further two ads, producing a total of 286 ads within the final dataset. These ads were then coded according to the dimensions of age, race and LGBTQ+ membership. Ads were coded for every LGBTQ+ portrayal shown, thus often multiple characters were displayed within each ad and were analysed per individual depiction.&#13;
Analysis&#13;
Qualitative Analysis of Interviews&#13;
After transcription, all interviews were analysed through inductive thematic analysis due to the exploratory nature of the research (Braun &amp; Clarke, 2006). This process adhered to their six phases of analysis: familiarization of the data, initial code generation, theme search, theme review, defining and naming themes and report production, which allowed the researcher to identify the themes that underpin consumer responses and attitudes towards LGBTQ+ portrayals. This analysis was conducted through NVivo 12 qualitative data analysis software. &#13;
Quantitative Analysis of ad Intersectionality &#13;
Quantitative analyses of the dataset were conducted through collation of codes ascribed to portrayals across time. The depictions were summarised across intersectional and unidimensional measures according to which year they belonged to. This was analysed as a singular project as well as comparatively against the original findings from Nölke (2018), which allowed to researcher to demonstrate how portrayals of the LGBTQ+ community in advertising have transformed from 2009-2020. In addition to the researcher, a secondary coder was randomly assigned 25 ads from the dataset in order to test inter-rater reliability, which stood at 100% across all coding dimensions.</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="45">
            <name>Publisher</name>
            <description>An entity responsible for making the resource available</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2820">
                <text>Lancaster University </text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="42">
            <name>Format</name>
            <description>The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2821">
                <text>Data/Excel.csv&#13;
Text/Nvivo</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="43">
            <name>Identifier</name>
            <description>An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2822">
                <text>Edgington2021</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="37">
            <name>Contributor</name>
            <description>An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2823">
                <text>Yuxin Zhang</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="47">
            <name>Rights</name>
            <description>Information about rights held in and over the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2824">
                <text>Open</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="46">
            <name>Relation</name>
            <description>A related resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2825">
                <text>Qualitative analysis has no relation. Content analysis extends the work of Nölke (2018)</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="44">
            <name>Language</name>
            <description>A language of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2826">
                <text>English</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="51">
            <name>Type</name>
            <description>The nature or genre of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2827">
                <text>Data and Text</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="38">
            <name>Coverage</name>
            <description>The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="2828">
                <text>LA1 4YF</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
    </elementSetContainer>
  </item>
  <item itemId="201" public="1" featured="0">
    <fileContainer>
      <file fileId="228">
        <src>https://johnntowse.com/LUSTRE/files/original/ea2c0c6f1d9da3c754aeca4f45c6e344.pdf</src>
        <authentication>bcd96b51fb4c89cefd082eb9845b288a</authentication>
      </file>
    </fileContainer>
    <collection collectionId="9">
      <elementSetContainer>
        <elementSet elementSetId="1">
          <name>Dublin Core</name>
          <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/.</description>
          <elementContainer>
            <element elementId="50">
              <name>Title</name>
              <description>A name given to the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="499">
                  <text>Behavioural observations</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
            <element elementId="41">
              <name>Description</name>
              <description>An account of the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="500">
                  <text>Project focusing on observation of behaviours.&#13;
Includes infant habituation studies</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
          </elementContainer>
        </elementSet>
      </elementSetContainer>
    </collection>
    <elementSetContainer>
      <elementSet elementSetId="1">
        <name>Dublin Core</name>
        <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/.</description>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="50">
            <name>Title</name>
            <description>A name given to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="4007">
                <text>Investigating infant expectation on object search tasks.  </text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="39">
            <name>Creator</name>
            <description>An entity primarily responsible for making the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="4008">
                <text>Leah Murphy</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="40">
            <name>Date</name>
            <description>A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="4009">
                <text>2023</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="41">
            <name>Description</name>
            <description>An account of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="4010">
                <text>The current study aims to distinguish between Piaget’s (1954) theory of object understanding, highlighting the &#13;
role of object permanence on A not B task performance, and Diamond’s (1985) theory highlighting the role of &#13;
motor demands and lack of ability to inhibit habitual behaviours during the task. These two theories differ in &#13;
their predictions for the expectations of the infants taking part, with Piaget (1954) predicting that infants’ lack &#13;
of object permanence causes poor performance on the task and Diamond (1985) predicting that infants &#13;
understand the movement of objects and a lack of inhibition of habitual behaviours cause error in performance. &#13;
We tested 15 nine-month-old infants on a looking version of the A not B task. The use of impossible and possible &#13;
outcomes was also incorporated on B trials, with the object being revealed from either the correct or incorrect &#13;
location (e.g., see Ahmed &amp; Ruffman, 1998). Infant first look direction, accumulated looking time during trials &#13;
and the number of social looks initiated post-outcome, were used as measures. We found significant evidence &#13;
of  the ‘AB’ error during trials, with an significantly increased number of incorrect first looks on B trials. There &#13;
was also a descriptive pattern showing surprise at object location reveals with increased number of social looks &#13;
during B compared to A trials, though this was not significant. Accumulated looking analysis showed that infants &#13;
looked longer on A than B trials, suggesting that infants expected the object to be in location B on B trials, &#13;
demonstrating infants’ ability to understand objects and supporting Diamond’s (1985) theory. However, &#13;
implications for a small sample size and presence of individual differences on interpretation of looking time data &#13;
are discussed. Implications in theory and future research are suggested and overall, results provide support for &#13;
the application of Piaget’s (1954) theory and suggest that infants have limited object understanding based on &#13;
their displayed expectations during testing.</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="49">
            <name>Subject</name>
            <description>The topic of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="4011">
                <text>Infant, behaviours, theory</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="48">
            <name>Source</name>
            <description>A related resource from which the described resource is derived</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="4012">
                <text>3.1. Participants &#13;
In this study, 15 participants took part, aged 8 months and 12 days to 9 months and 27 days old (M = 9 &#13;
months and 3 days, SD= 11.3 days). Six further infants were excluded from data analysis as they became too &#13;
fussy to complete the study. Participants were recruited from the Lancaster Baby lab database, along with the &#13;
Lancaster Baby lab Facebook page and were also recruited via word of mouth from guardians taking part in the &#13;
study.  &#13;
3.2. Materials &#13;
The video stimuli were created using Canva software (Canva.com, 2023) and was uploaded onto ‘Habit &#13;
2’ software (see Oakes et al., 2019) to display the stimuli during testing and to measure the accumulated looking &#13;
time of the infant participants. The stimuli involved a novel object obtained from the NOUN database (Horst &amp; &#13;
Hout, 2016). A camera was used to record the social looks exchanged between the infant and guardian, as well &#13;
as the direction of the infants’ first looks during testing.  &#13;
3.3. Design &#13;
This study had a within-subjects design, with all participants being exposed to the same experimental &#13;
conditions and the same stimuli. To counterbalance for location effects, half of the participants witnessed A &#13;
trials being hidden in the box on the left, whilst the other half witnessed the object being hidden in the box on &#13;
the right during A trials. The presentation of the accurate and inaccurate B trials was further counterbalanced &#13;
across participants, as half of the participants viewed the inaccurate B trials first, and the other half viewed the &#13;
accurate B trials first. &#13;
3.4. Ethical approval &#13;
Ethical approval for this study was granted by the departmental ethics committee (DEC) at Lancaster &#13;
University. Guardians were recruited via their preferred contact method and were sent the participant &#13;
information sheet to read before agreeing to take part in the study. A date and time of testing was arranged at &#13;
the Babylab building at Lancaster University, via telephone or email. Upon arrival, guardians were presented &#13;
with the consent form to sign and initial all points before being allowed to take part. They were also given the &#13;
opportunity to ask any questions  about the study and were informed that they could withdraw at any time. &#13;
After the study, the guardian received a five-pound contribution to travel costs, along with a free children’s book &#13;
for the infant, as a reward for taking part in the study. The guardian also received a debrief sheet to read and to &#13;
take home, providing them with all contact information of the lead researcher, if they wished to ask any &#13;
questions or to withdraw from the study.  &#13;
3.5. Procedure &#13;
The testing took place in a private room within the Whewell building at Lancaster University. The infant &#13;
and guardian were sat in front of a computer screen with the infant sat in a highchair positioned directly in front &#13;
of the screen, and the guardian sat in a chair to the side, slightly behind the infant (to allow researchers to see &#13;
clearly when the infant initiated a social look). The experimenter sat behind a divider at a computer, out of sight &#13;
of the infant and guardian. A social engagement video of the experimenter saying, “Let’s hide the blap, can you &#13;
find the blap?” was presented to the infants at the start of the experiment and between each trial, to insert &#13;
social communication and guide the attention of the infant to the screen before the stimuli were presented. The &#13;
infant then watched a series of video stimuli in which a novel object appeared on the screen and moved into &#13;
one of two boxes, both boxes were then covered (the object was hidden), and a there was a delay period of five &#13;
seconds (see figure 1). After the delay period, both boxes were revealed, and the location of the toy was visible &#13;
to the infant. Any movement of the object was accompanied by a sound to guide the attention of the infant to &#13;
the object, but this sound was not present when the object was revealed to avoid any leading factors when &#13;
measuring infant expectation. Instead, the occluders made a simple “whoosh” sound when they were removed, &#13;
to ensure the infant was paying attention. After five identical A trials, the object was then hidden in the second &#13;
location and the process was repeated consisting of six B trials. However, during the B trials, the object was &#13;
hidden in the second location, but was either revealed to be in the correct (accurate) or incorrect (inaccurate) &#13;
location (see figure 2). This variation in outcome was presented alternately to the infant, with the object being &#13;
revealed from the incorrect location for three out of the six B trials. The study lasted for approximately 10 &#13;
minutes per participant.  &#13;
Figure 1 &#13;
Example of A not B task stimuli presentation during A trials or accurate B trials.  &#13;
Figure 2 &#13;
Example of A not B task stimuli presentation during inaccurate B trials.  &#13;
3.6. Behavioural coding &#13;
Infant looking time was coded online as trial lengths were infant controlled. Each trial ended when the &#13;
infant looked away for four seconds. As this controlled the trial length, this was not double coded as this &#13;
inherently will lead to a high agreement level. For the coding of infant first look and number of social looks, the &#13;
videos recorded of the participants were saved and uploaded onto Microsoft OneDrive to be offline coded. First &#13;
look was defined as the direction that the infant first looked towards once the occluder was removed and the &#13;
object was revealed. On trials where the infant was not looking as the occluder was removed, the first look was &#13;
defined as the direction in which they looked once their gaze returned to the screen. The first look direction was &#13;
coded as correct and incorrect. The number of social looks initiated by the infant per trial was also measured &#13;
during coding, defined by the infant turning towards the guardian during each trial after an outcome was &#13;
revealed. Twenty percent of the videos were dual coded and there were no discrepancies between researchers &#13;
during the dual coding process for first looks (r = 1, p&lt;0.01) or social looking (r= 1, p&lt;0.01).</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="45">
            <name>Publisher</name>
            <description>An entity responsible for making the resource available</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="4013">
                <text>Lancaster University</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="42">
            <name>Format</name>
            <description>The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="4014">
                <text>Text/Word.doc</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="43">
            <name>Identifier</name>
            <description>An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="4015">
                <text>Murphy2023</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="37">
            <name>Contributor</name>
            <description>An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="4016">
                <text>Alicja Kowalska</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="47">
            <name>Rights</name>
            <description>Information about rights held in and over the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="4017">
                <text>Open</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="46">
            <name>Relation</name>
            <description>A related resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="4018">
                <text>None</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="44">
            <name>Language</name>
            <description>A language of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="4019">
                <text>English</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="51">
            <name>Type</name>
            <description>The nature or genre of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="4020">
                <text>Text</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="38">
            <name>Coverage</name>
            <description>The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="4021">
                <text>LA1 4YW</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
      <elementSet elementSetId="4">
        <name>LUSTRE</name>
        <description>Adds LUSTRE specific project information</description>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="52">
            <name>Supervisor</name>
            <description>Name of the project supervisor</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="4022">
                <text>Kirsty Dunn</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="53">
            <name>Project Level</name>
            <description>Project levels should be entered as UG or MSC</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="4023">
                <text>MSc</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="54">
            <name>Topic</name>
            <description>Should contain the sub-category of Psychology the project falls under</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="4024">
                <text>Developmental</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="56">
            <name>Sample Size</name>
            <description/>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="4025">
                <text>15 participants</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="55">
            <name>Statistical Analysis Type</name>
            <description>The type of statistical analysis used in the project</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="4026">
                <text>Correlation</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
    </elementSetContainer>
  </item>
  <item itemId="158" public="1" featured="0">
    <itemType itemTypeId="14">
      <name>Dataset</name>
      <description>Data encoded in a defined structure. Examples include lists, tables, and databases. A dataset may be useful for direct machine processing.</description>
    </itemType>
    <elementSetContainer>
      <elementSet elementSetId="1">
        <name>Dublin Core</name>
        <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/.</description>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="50">
            <name>Title</name>
            <description>A name given to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3220">
                <text>Exploring the Effectiveness of Metaphors in Video Advertising - the Interaction Effect of Different Cultural Groups and Different Metaphors </text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="39">
            <name>Creator</name>
            <description>An entity primarily responsible for making the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3221">
                <text>Lesley Wu</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="40">
            <name>Date</name>
            <description>A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3222">
                <text>7th September 2022</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="41">
            <name>Description</name>
            <description>An account of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3223">
                <text>Metaphors are often used in contemporary advertising, and previous research has confirmed that advertisements with metaphors are more effective than literal ones. At the same time, research into the role of metaphors has become more comprehensive, moving from traditional metaphor theories based solely on literal language to the study of the interactive effects of different modalities of metaphor (multimodal metaphor). The aim of this study was to understand the differences in the responses of different cultural groups when exposed to advertisements containing different types of metaphors (needs-highlighting metaphor vs. feature-highlighting metaphor). Based on this expectation, a 2 (cultures: British, Chinese) x 3 (advertisement types: feature-highlighting metaphors, needs-highlighting metaphors, and literal advertisements) designed experiment was conducted to test.</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="49">
            <name>Subject</name>
            <description>The topic of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3224">
                <text>Marketing&#13;
Psycholinguistics</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="48">
            <name>Source</name>
            <description>A related resource from which the described resource is derived</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3225">
                <text>Design &#13;
To obtain statistics on the extent to which creative metaphor in video advertising contribute to the effectiveness of advertisement, a quantitative research method was used in this study. To test if there was an interaction effect between cultural group and metaphor types, this experiment had a 3×2 mixed design, with a within-subjects factor of advertisement type (feature-highlighting metaphors, needs-highlighting metaphors, and literal advertisements), and a between-subjects factor of participants’ culture (British and Chinese). The dependent variables were attitude toward the product/advert and purchase intentions.  &#13;
Participants &#13;
Fifty-three participants were recruited through convenience sampling and participated in the study by completing an online survey. The responses obtained from participants who either did not complete the consent form or did not answer all the questions were excluded from the analyses. This led to a total of 40 responses retained: 20 from Westerners, 10 men and 10 women; 20 from Chinese participants, 9 men and 11 women. Table 1 provides an overview of the participants’ information in this experiment. Most of the participants are currently studying at Lancaster University, some of the Chinese participants are currently living in China. As the aim of the experiment was to look at cultural differences, therefore, no specific age restrictions were set.   &#13;
Materials &#13;
In the current experiment, the selection of stimulus classification conditions was based on the setting of Pan's study in 2020. However, in order to investigate the pattern and consistency of people's responses under different conditions, the number of stimuli under each condition classification was larger in this experiment. The stimuli consist of 9 video ads in total: 3 ads each for the literal, feature-highlighting metaphor, and needs-highlighting metaphor conditions. All ads featured tangible products: perfume, body wash and deodorant, with 3 ads per product covering all 3 conditions. The experimental manipulation was based on the metaphorical dimension of the advertisements. Table 2 provides an overview of advertisement conditions and the links to view them.  &#13;
The metaphor condition contained at least one metaphor in the stimuli, while the literal advertisement was used as a control condition. The length of the selected advertisements was controlled to be less than 120 seconds (about 2 minutes). Advertisements that have been created in recent years were chosen, between 2012 and 2021.  &#13;
Phau and Prendergast' study (2000) found that consumers associated the image of a brand with the image of its country of origin. In order to minimise the influence of consumers' previous perceptions of brand image, the advertisements chosen for this experiment were made for well-known brands, whose countries of origin were all developed countries, such as the USA, the UK and Japan. &#13;
Advertisements created from different countries were chosen; therefore, the language of the original advertisements were Chinese, English and Japanese. All advertisements were translated into Chinese and English with subtitles, which were checked by native Chinese speakers with undergraduate degrees in Japanese translation and English translation. As the video exceeds the size of the attachments that could be added to the Qualtrics questionnaire, the video advertisements with bilingual subtitles were uploaded to OneDrive and the link was added to the questionnaire for participants to view. All selected video advertisements were sourced from internet platforms. &#13;
To measure attitudes toward the ad and purchase intentions, questions were formulated based on questions previously used in marketing research (Jeong, 2008; Kim, Baek &amp; Choi, 2012; Pan, 2020). &#13;
Attitudes towards advertisement. Participants were asked to rate/evaluate the ad on 4 scales, i.e., to what extent they agreed that the ad is ‘good’, ‘favourable’, ‘pleasant’, and ‘appealing’; the scales ranged from 1 (Strongly disagree) to 7 (Strongly agree) (Jeong, 2008).  &#13;
Purchase intentions. Participants were asked to rate the value of the item being promoted, the probability of purchasing the promoted product, and the probability of recommending the products to their family or friends (Maheswaran &amp; Meyers-Levy, 1990). &#13;
The original questions above were in English and were translated into Chinese for Chinese participants who took part in this study. The translations were checked for equivalence of meaning by a native Chinese translator researcher in English. Variables and measures in this study are provided in Table 3. &#13;
 &#13;
Procedure &#13;
All ethical guidelines related to data collection, and informed consent were reviewed and approved by the Faculty of Science and Technology Research Ethics Committee at Lancaster University. The data collected were anonymised upon extraction from Qualtrics. no participant information beyond the critical data is included. &#13;
All participants were asked to complete an online questionnaire. They could access the survey either via a QR code or via the shared link from Qualtrics. The questionnaire was set up on Qualtrics in English and Chinese versions. The first section included a participant information sheet and the consent form, followed by the experimental section.  &#13;
In this section, each video advertisement and the corresponding questions were grouped into a separate question block, each with a link to a specific advertisement for participants to view. This was to make sure participants focus on watching and evaluating one advertisement at a time. To move to the next block, participants had to complete the question evaluating the current video and press a button to access the next question block. Participants rated the properties of each advertisement immediately following exposure to it. The order of ads presented was fully randomised and differed for each participant. To prevent participants' overall liking of the advertised brand, product or brand spokesperson from influencing their assessment of each attribute of the advertisement and obtain valid data,  participants were reminded in each question block of the cautions for rating the advertisement itself with a sentence, "If you have any knowledge of the brands or products, please try to rate the following ads, by excluding your liking of them (including the celebrity spokesperson) and your current purchasing needs. " At last, participants clicked the submit button, and were debriefed and thanked for their participation. The study took approximately 40 minutes and participants were paid £6.50 for their time.  &#13;
Statistical analysis &#13;
The data was examined and analysed using SPSS software. A two-way mixed ANOVA (analysis of variance) was used to examine the two independent variables, i.e., advertisement condition, within-participants, with 3 levels (needs-highlighting metaphor, feature-highlighting metaphor, literal) and culture, between-participants, with 2 groups (Chinese, British), and their effects on two dependent variables, i.e., attitude towards the advertisement, and purchase intentions.&#13;
</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="45">
            <name>Publisher</name>
            <description>An entity responsible for making the resource available</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3226">
                <text>Lancaster University</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="42">
            <name>Format</name>
            <description>The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3227">
                <text>SPSS.sav</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="43">
            <name>Identifier</name>
            <description>An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3228">
                <text>Wu2022</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="37">
            <name>Contributor</name>
            <description>An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3229">
                <text>Chrisie Pullin</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="47">
            <name>Rights</name>
            <description>Information about rights held in and over the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3230">
                <text>Open</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="46">
            <name>Relation</name>
            <description>A related resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3231">
                <text>None</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="44">
            <name>Language</name>
            <description>A language of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3232">
                <text>English and Chinese</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="51">
            <name>Type</name>
            <description>The nature or genre of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3233">
                <text>Data</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="38">
            <name>Coverage</name>
            <description>The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3234">
                <text>LA1 4YF</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
      <elementSet elementSetId="4">
        <name>LUSTRE</name>
        <description>Adds LUSTRE specific project information</description>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="52">
            <name>Supervisor</name>
            <description>Name of the project supervisor</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3235">
                <text>Francesca Citron</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="53">
            <name>Project Level</name>
            <description>Project levels should be entered as UG or MSC</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3236">
                <text>MSC</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="54">
            <name>Topic</name>
            <description>Should contain the sub-category of Psychology the project falls under</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3237">
                <text>Marketing&#13;
Psycholinguistics</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="56">
            <name>Sample Size</name>
            <description/>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3238">
                <text>40</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="55">
            <name>Statistical Analysis Type</name>
            <description>The type of statistical analysis used in the project</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3239">
                <text>Mixed ANOVA</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
    </elementSetContainer>
  </item>
  <item itemId="191" public="1" featured="0">
    <collection collectionId="8">
      <elementSetContainer>
        <elementSet elementSetId="1">
          <name>Dublin Core</name>
          <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/.</description>
          <elementContainer>
            <element elementId="50">
              <name>Title</name>
              <description>A name given to the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="191">
                  <text>Ratings</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
            <element elementId="41">
              <name>Description</name>
              <description>An account of the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="192">
                  <text>Studies where participants make a series of ratings or judgements when presented with stimuli</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
          </elementContainer>
        </elementSet>
      </elementSetContainer>
    </collection>
    <elementSetContainer>
      <elementSet elementSetId="1">
        <name>Dublin Core</name>
        <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/.</description>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="50">
            <name>Title</name>
            <description>A name given to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3812">
                <text>The Effects of Posture on Body Part Width Representations </text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="39">
            <name>Creator</name>
            <description>An entity primarily responsible for making the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3813">
                <text>Lettie Wareing</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="40">
            <name>Date</name>
            <description>A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3814">
                <text>2023</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="41">
            <name>Description</name>
            <description>An account of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3815">
                <text>Despite the ubiquity of our bodily experiences, our representations of our body’s size are not geometrically accurate. For example, when estimating the length of body parts using the hand as a metric, consistent patterns of distortions across body parts are observed. Given the presence of these distortions, some have proposed that representations of length and width emerge directly, or indirectly, from the organisation of somatotopic maps in somatosensory cortex, rather than from their actual relative dimensions. However, whilst length representations are well researched with respect to this notion, less is known about representations of body part width across the body. Moreover, it is unclear from previous research whether body part width representations may be confounded by participants’ posture. Specifically, individuals have shown an enhanced tendency to overestimate body part width when seated upon a chair, suggesting that the chair may become incorporated into the body representation. Consequently, the aim of the current investigation was to further elucidate how width is represented across body parts and whether posture moderates these representations. Participants estimated how many hands widths made up the width of the back, shoulders, hips, torso, thigh, and head in one of three conditions: standing (n = 37), seated upon a chair (n = 33), or seated upon a backless stool (n = 39). Whilst estimates did differ across body parts, no effect of posture was observed. Moreover, the patterns of distortions observed differed from those seen in previous investigations. Results therefore indicate that body part width representations are neither accurate nor fixed, rather, they show distortions which vary across individuals and contexts. It is proposed that inter-individual heterogeneity in width representations may result from humans possessing alternative perceptual mechanisms for judging aperture passability. Therefore, maintaining fixed width representations is unnecessary, and hence too energetically costly to maintain.&#13;
&#13;
</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="49">
            <name>Subject</name>
            <description>The topic of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3816">
                <text>Body perception, affordances, somatosensation, visual perception</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="48">
            <name>Source</name>
            <description>A related resource from which the described resource is derived</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3817">
                <text>Method&#13;
Participants&#13;
Ethical approval for this study was obtained from Lancaster University Psychology Department on 31st May 2023.&#13;
As this study aimed to investigate body part width representations in healthy populations, only participants aged 18-55 years without any physical, or mental impairment were included in the study. However, as previous research (Readman et al., 2021) using the same paradigm for length estimates has shown no influence of anxiety or depression on body part estimates, participants with diagnoses of these conditions were not excluded. Participants were excluded if they had any current or historic diagnosis of cognitive impairment, as this can affect instruction comprehension (Han et al., 2011), or visual impairment, to ensure difficulties in seeing the body parts did not confound findings. Furthermore, given the associations between other psychiatric impairments (e.g., Priebe &amp; Röhricht, 2001), neurological impairments (e.g., Blanke et al., 2004), or eating disorders (Mölbert et al., 2017) with distorted body perceptions, individuals with a current or historic diagnosis of a condition falling within any of these categories were excluded. &#13;
A total of 123 (61 females) participants ranging from 18 to 68 years (M = 28.80 years, SD = 10.79) were recruited via opportunity sampling for this study. Participant recruitment was ended before the required N = 150 due to time constraints. All participants were entered into a draw to win one of two £25 vouchers as an expression of goodwill. A total of 15 participants were excluded for failing to meet the inclusion criteria, leaving a final sample of N = 108 (50 females). Participants were aged 18 to 55 years (M = 27.98 years, SD = 9.56); the majority of participants were right-handed (n = 99) and over half the participants had normal vision (52.78%), with the remaining participants having corrected-to-normal vision. &#13;
Reasons for exclusion included a current or historic psychiatric impairment (n = 2) or eating disorder (n = 4), falling outside the study age restrictions (n = 3), visual impairment (n = 2), being pregnant (n = 1), failing to provide demographic information needed to determine eligibility (n = 2), and a self-reported misunderstanding of task instructions (n = 1). &#13;
Design&#13;
This study constituted a 3x6 mixed design with condition (standing, chair, or stool) as the between-subjects variable and body part (torso, hips, shoulders, back, thigh, or head) as the within-subjects variable. The dependent variable was participants’ accuracy ratios for each body part (actual size/ estimated size) where an accuracy ratio of over 1.0 indicated overestimation, and under 1.0 indicated underestimation of body part width.&#13;
Materials and Procedure&#13;
After providing their consent, participants completed a self-report demographic and clinical questionnaire administered via Qualtrics (Qualtrics, Provo, UT) which asked about participants’ age, biological sex, preferred hand, and details regarding their neurological, cognitive, and psychiatric history.&#13;
Following this, participants were randomised to one of the three conditions (Standing, Chair, or Stool). In each condition, participants were asked to estimate how many hand widths of their dominant hand made up the width of six different body parts: the torso, shoulders, hips, back, head, and thigh. Participants were instructed to be as accurate as possible, using fractions where necessary. They were asked to refrain from touching the body part with their hand, or basing estimates off estimates for previous body parts if the two body parts were proportionally related. The researcher defined each body part verbally and pointed to their endpoints on their own body prior to the participant making their estimate. &#13;
Participants in the standing condition performed all estimates whilst stood upright, without leaning on any surfaces. In the chair condition, participants were seated upon a standard desk chair with a high back and no arm rests. In the stool condition, participants were seated upon a fixed height bar stool with no back. The condition completed by participants was counterbalanced, and the order of body parts estimated was randomised.&#13;
After making their estimates, the researcher used a soft tape measure to measure the actual width of the cued body parts before debriefing participants. The study took around 10 minutes to complete.&#13;
Analysis&#13;
Prior to conducting the analysis, outliers were removed using the median absolute deviation (MAD) approach. This procedure involves removing participants whose accuracy ratios deviated more than three absolute deviations from the median for a given body part. The MAD approach was chosen as it is more robust than traditional methods of outlier detection based upon standard deviations from the mean (Jones, 2019; Leys et al., 2013).&#13;
To calculate the dependent variable of accuracy ratios, first, participants’ hand estimates for each body part were converted to centimetres by multiplying their estimate in hands by their measured hand width. After this, estimates for each body part were divided by the actual width of the body part to produce an accuracy ratio. &#13;
To test the study hypotheses, data was analysed using a 3x6 mixed ANOVA using the rstatix package available from RStudio (Version 4.2.1). Body Part was entered as the within-subjects variable, and Condition as the between-subjects variable. The assumption of normality was checked using the Shapiro-Wilks test, and the sphericity assumption via Mauchly’s test. Partial eta-squared was used as a measure of effect size.&#13;
Though frequently used in analysis, frequentist statistics are not without limitations. It is typically assumed that a p-value of &lt;.05 is evidence for the alternative hypothesis, however this value only represents the probability of obtaining results as extreme as those observed, if the null is true (Wagenmakers et al., 2018). Therefore, data which is unusual under the null hypothesis is not automatically any less unusual under the experimental hypothesis (Wagenmakers et al., 2017). Moreover, a non-significant finding in frequentist analyses cannot be taken as evidence in favour of the null hypothesis (Kruschke &amp; Liddell, 2018). In this regard, Bayesian statistics have several advantages over frequentist statistics including the ability to incorporate prior knowledge, quantify the degree of uncertainty surrounding the existence of an effect, and the ability to quantify the strength of evidence in favour of the null, or alternative hypotheses (see Wagenmaker et al., 2018 for a discussion). &#13;
Consequently, to provide further support for conclusions drawn using frequentist analyses, a Bayesian Mixed ANOVA was conducted using the anovaBF function from the BayesFactor available in RStudio (Version 4.2.1). Default priors were used given that these reflect average effect sizes observed across all psychological experiments, and hence are likely to be more reliable than priors drawn from a single, potentially methodologically flawed, study (Rouder et al., 2012).  &#13;
Where a significant main effect of Body Part or Condition was observed, Holm-Bonferroni adjusted frequentist, and Bayes Factor, pairwise t-test comparisons were conducted to determine the pattern of differences underlying these effects. &#13;
In addition, to determine whether body part width estimates differed significantly from 1.0 (i.e., an unbiased estimate), Holm-Bonferroni adjusted frequentist, and Bayes Factor, one-sample t-tests were conducted for each body part. &#13;
To judge the strength of evidence provided by the Bayes Factor analyses, Kass and Raftery (1993) criteria was used. By this criteria, Anecdotal evidence is regarded as inconclusive. Percentage error (a measure of certainty in the estimate) was reported alongside Bayes Factors, where &lt;20% is regarded as an acceptable level of uncertainty (Van Doorn et al., 2021).&#13;
&#13;
</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="45">
            <name>Publisher</name>
            <description>An entity responsible for making the resource available</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3818">
                <text>Lancaster University</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="42">
            <name>Format</name>
            <description>The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3819">
                <text>Data/Excel.csv</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="43">
            <name>Identifier</name>
            <description>An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3820">
                <text>Wareing2023</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="37">
            <name>Contributor</name>
            <description>An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3821">
                <text>Leanna Keeble</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="47">
            <name>Rights</name>
            <description>Information about rights held in and over the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3822">
                <text>Open</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="46">
            <name>Relation</name>
            <description>A related resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3823">
                <text>None </text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="44">
            <name>Language</name>
            <description>A language of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3824">
                <text>English</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="51">
            <name>Type</name>
            <description>The nature or genre of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3825">
                <text>Data</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="38">
            <name>Coverage</name>
            <description>The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3826">
                <text>LA1 4YF</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
      <elementSet elementSetId="4">
        <name>LUSTRE</name>
        <description>Adds LUSTRE specific project information</description>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="52">
            <name>Supervisor</name>
            <description>Name of the project supervisor</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3827">
                <text>Dr Sally Linkenauger</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="53">
            <name>Project Level</name>
            <description>Project levels should be entered as UG or MSC</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3828">
                <text>MSc</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="54">
            <name>Topic</name>
            <description>Should contain the sub-category of Psychology the project falls under</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3829">
                <text>Cognitive, perception</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="56">
            <name>Sample Size</name>
            <description/>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3830">
                <text>123</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="55">
            <name>Statistical Analysis Type</name>
            <description>The type of statistical analysis used in the project</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="3831">
                <text>ANOVA, Bayesian Analysis, T-Test</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
    </elementSetContainer>
  </item>
</itemContainer>
