Faculty of Business, Law and Social Sciences
Faculty of Business, Law and Social Sciences
Psychology Department Assessment Coversheet and Feedback Form
Complete the details marked in the coloured text and leave everything else blank. Copy and paste your submission after the first pages as indicated. You are reminded of the University regulations on cheating. Except where the assessment is group-based, the final piece of work which is submitted must be your own work. Close similarity between submissions is likely to lead to an investigation for cheating. You must submit a file in an MSWord or equivalent format as tutors will use MSWord to provide feedback including, where appropriate, annotations in the text.
Student Name Reasonable Adjustments Student Number Check this box [x] if the Faculty has notified you that you are eligible for a Reasonable Adjustment (including additional time) in relation to the marking of this assessment. Please note that action may be taken under the Universitys Student Disciplinary Procedure against any student making a false claim for Reasonable Adjustments.
Course and Year Module Code PSY6097 Module Title Integrative Psychology Research Project (Dissertation) Module Tutor Dr Emily Harrison & Dr Simon Snape Personal Tutor First Marker Name: First Marker Signature: Date: Feedback: General comments on the quality of the work, its successes and where it could be improved
Provisional Uncapped Mark Marks will be capped if this was a late submission or resit assessment and may be moderated up or down by the examination board.
%
Feed Forward: How to apply the feedback to future submissions
Second Marker Name: Second Marker Signature: Date: Feedback: General comments on the quality of the work, its successes and where it could be improved
Feed Forward: How to apply the feedback to future submissions
Quality and use of Standard English and Academic Conventions
Spelling Errors Style is Colloquial Standard is a Cause for Concern
Grammatical Errors Inappropriate Structure If the box above has been ticked you should arrange a consultation with a member of staff from the Centre for Academic Success via Success@bcu.ac.uk
Punctuation Errors Inadequate Referencing 0 39%
Fail 40 49%
Third 50 59%
2:2 60 69%
2:1 70 79%
First 80 100%
First
Criterion 1
Mark:
Formulate research questions and appropriate design based on methodological rationale.
Demonstrates no or insufficient knowledge of the underlying literature.
There is no rationale for the current study.
Research questions may have been omitted or will be unclear.
The project has not been designed well. Demonstrates basic or simple knowledge literature of the underlying literature.
There is no or a tenuous link between the literature and the rationale for the current study.
Research questions are included but there is no or a tenuous link between these and the gaps in existing knowledge.
The project has not been designed well. Demonstrates an adequate or reasonable understanding and knowledge literature of the underlying literature.
A rationale for the current study is present and related to the literature presented but may be unclear or lacking in operationalisation.
Research questions have been formulated based on the gaps in existing knowledge.
The project has been designed to an adequate standard for this level of study. Demonstrates a solid understanding and knowledge literature of the underlying literature.
There is a clear rationale for the current study that is linked back to the literature presented.
Clear research questions have been formulated based on the gaps in existing knowledge.
The project is well designed given the level of study. Demonstrates a broad and theoretically informed understanding and knowledge literature of the underlying literature.
There is a clear and well defined rationale for the current study that is linked back to the literature presented.
Clear and concise research questions have been formulated based on the gaps in existing knowledge and it is clear how the project will advance this knowledge.
The project has been designed very well given the level of study, but is not yet approaching publishable standard. Demonstrates a detailed and theoretically informed understanding and knowledge literature of the underlying literature, suggesting a level of expertise in the relevant area(s).
There is a clear and well defined rationale for the current study, which considers how the research can be applied or used in context.
Clear, concise and novel research questions have been formulated based on well-defined gaps in existing knowledge, this project adds to the existing literature in a novel and significant manner.
The project has been designed to an exceptional standard and is approaching or at the level required for publication.
Criterion 2
Mark: Justify, critique and synthesise their own research in the light of existing psychological literature.
The justification for the research project is absent or very limited. It may be poorly communicated to the extent that it is unclear.
There is no or very limited evidence of critical evaluation abilities in relation to both the current project and relevant existing psychological literature. The justification for the research project is present, but is weak or lacks support.
There is limited evidence of critical evaluation skills in relation to the current project and relevant existing psychological literature. The justification for the research project is adequate for the level of study, it may lack some support or present minor logical errors.
There is evidence of basic, but sensible, critical evaluation skills in relation to the current project and existing psychological literature. These might present as critiques that do not feed into the justification of the project. The justification for the research project indicates a clear and solid understanding of the relevant literature.
There is evidence of some interesting and well-expressed critical evaluation, of the current project, in the light of existing psychological literature with attention to detail. The presentation and execution of the evaluation suggests a more than basic understanding of the literature but may still lack detail. The justification for the research project is well written and implies a depth of understanding of the relevant literature.
There is evidence of regular and appropriate critical evaluation of the current project, in the light of existing psychological literature, with consistent attention to detail. This implies an understanding based, largely, on well-selected, timely and relevant psychological literature and theory. The presentation and execution of the evaluation is well presented and accessible belying a detailed level of understanding. The justification for the research project is complete and at, or near, the standard required for publication. Implying a level of expertise in the relevant topics and a depth and breadth of understanding.
The current project is critically evaluated at the majority of or all appropriate points with largely unwavering attention to detail. This is done in the light of existing, timely, relevant psychological literature with clear reference to theory and practice (where appropriate). The presentation and execution of the evaluation is at or approaching the standard of expertise.
Criterion 3
Mark: Analyse, appraise and communicate the findings of their research effectively.
Analysis of results is absent, or very limited. What is presented is unclear or lacking support from data.
Findings have not been communicated effectively and lack sufficient detail, implying no or little understanding of the analysis methods used. The results of the research project have been analysed, but this has been performed inappropriately. This may be through an inappropriate method for the dataset and research question(s).
Attempts have been made to communicate findings, this lacks sufficient detail implying a superficial understanding of the analysis performed. The results of the research project have been analysed using acceptable methods given the dataset, though these may still not fully answer the research question(s).
Findings have been appraised and communicated effectively for the most part, although more detail may be required in places. This implies a basic understanding of the analysis performed. The results of the research project have been analysed using acceptable methods given the dataset, and largely answer the research question(s) posed.
Findings have been appraised well and communicated effectively and in an accessible manner. Overall this has been achieved due to good attention to detail and a solid understanding of the analytical strategy. The results of the research project have been analysed appropriately, with consideration to most elements of the research question(s).
Findings have been appraised well and communicated effectively, with attention to detail and consideration of theoretical perspectives where applicable. The results of the research project have been analysed appropriately. All elements of the research question are considered and addressed and the dataset was fully exploited.
Findings have been appraised well and communicated to a standard at, or close to, that of published work. There is clear and consistent attention to detail and consideration of theoretical perspectives where applicable. All whilst retaining the level of accessibility that is expected in the given field.
Criterion 4
Mark: Conduct ethical research in an autonomous, organised and timely manner under supervision.
The research project has not been conducted in an autonomous manner.
The student has demonstrated no or little organisation and time management skills and has either required an inordinate amount of supervision or has not engaged at all with supervision.
The student has shown no or fragmented knowledge of ethical considerations. The research project has not been conducted in an autonomous manner.
The student has either required more than typical supervision or has only engaged with supervision to a limited extent.
Organisation and time management have been limited but attempts are made.
The student has shown a limited or weak knowledge of ethical considerations. The research project has been conducted in a partly autonomous manner.
The volume of supervision is around the level expected, though organisation and time management skills may still require work.
The student has shown a basic knowledge of ethical considerations. The research project has been conducted in a mostly autonomous manner.
The volume of supervision is typical of a student at this level, organisation and time management skills are clearly present.
The student has shown a clear knowledge of ethical considerations and applied these to their work. The research project has been conducted in an autonomous manner, with appropriate reliance on supervision. The organisation and time management are well established.
The student has shown a depth of knowledge of ethical considerations and applied these to their work. The research project has been conducted in an autonomous manner throughout. The student showed good management of supervisory time and took advantage of opportunities as they were presented. Organisation and time-management skills were second nature by the end of the project.
The student has shown a comprehensive depth of knowledge and clear understanding of ethical considerations and applied these to their work.
Title here [up to 20 words]
Your name [first name, middle initial, surname]
Student Number
Supervisor
Psychology Department, Birmingham City University
Word count:
Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of BSc (Hons) Psychology/Psychology with Criminology/Psychology with Sociology/Psychology with Business of Birmingham City University.
Authors Declaration
I, .. declare that the dissertation entitled . and the work presented in this dissertation are both my own, and have been generated by me as the result of my own original research. I confirm that:
This work was done wholly while in candidature for a degree at this University.
Where I have quoted from the work of others, the source is always given. With the exception of such quotations, this dissertation is entirely my own work.
I have acknowledged all main sources of help.
Contents
TOC o "1-3" h z u List of figures and tables PAGEREF _Toc72748679 h VIIIAbstract PAGEREF _Toc72748680 h IXAcknowledgements (optional) PAGEREF _Toc72748681 h 1Method PAGEREF _Toc72748682 h 5Design PAGEREF _Toc72748683 h 5Participants PAGEREF _Toc72748684 h 5Materials PAGEREF _Toc72748685 h 5Material 1 PAGEREF _Toc72748686 h 5Material 2 PAGEREF _Toc72748687 h 6Procedure PAGEREF _Toc72748688 h 6Ethics PAGEREF _Toc72748689 h 6Analysis/Results PAGEREF _Toc72748690 h 8Discussion PAGEREF _Toc72748691 h 10References (in APA 7th) PAGEREF _Toc72748692 h 14Appendix PAGEREF _Toc72748693 h 16Appendix A PAGEREF _Toc72748694 h 16Appendix B PAGEREF _Toc72748695 h 17
List of figures and tablesAbstractLorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Sed at cursus ligula. Vivamus eu magna aliquam, auctor tellus id, maximus lorem. Vivamus ac risus pharetra, viverra tellus quis, laoreet nisi. Nam risus tellus, pharetra vel tellus eu, ultricies finibus elit. Vestibulum venenatis ante leo, vitae pretium ipsum pulvinar at. Etiam dictum ante dolor, nec consequat neque varius sed. Proin tempus finibus bibendum. Morbi ex neque, consectetur vitae magna nec, scelerisque auctor mauris. Proin in tempus magna. Quisque nec posuere ipsum. Cras faucibus scelerisque nulla eu mattis. Proin sagittis, neque interdum suscipit tincidunt, mauris sem aliquet leo, eu imperdiet diam dolor ut nibh. Sed aliquam urna in ornare venenatis. Pellentesque habitant morbi tristique senectus et netus et malesuada fames ac turpis egestas. Sed mattis vel mauris in feugiat. Etiam suscipit pretium massa, eget accumsan sapien aliquam et. Maecenas et erat vel purus scelerisque consequat. Duis ipsum ex, condimentum nec dui sed.
Keywords: Lorem ipsum, Dolor sit amet, Consectetur adipiscing elit, Maecenas.
Acknowledgements (optional)
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Sed pretium, elit id efficitur laoreet, ante tortor sagittis magna, sed cursus ex erat et tellus. Praesent tincidunt at nibh vitae vulputate. Nullam euismod libero sed consectetur tempor. Donec dignissim turpis vel nisl consectetur ultricies. Fusce sit amet finibus purus, vitae bibendum mauris. Nunc a justo nec mauris rhoncus suscipit. In hac habitasse platea dictumst.
Donec ultricies tempor elit, a vulputate enim pulvinar ut. Vestibulum aliquet vitae nisi at dictum. Pellentesque habitant morbi tristique senectus et netus et malesuada fames ac turpis egestas. Aliquam suscipit mattis nulla, at egestas diam elementum ac. Cras varius laoreet posuere. Nulla sit amet tellus libero. Pellentesque nec sem ornare, hendrerit enim ac, lobortis metus. Sed pretium nulla felis, euismod luctus tellus pulvinar sed. Sed tempus ultrices placerat. Suspendisse sed leo neque. Etiam id nisi nec sapien eleifend rhoncus. Nullam hendrerit tellus sit amet vulputate commodo. Integer efficitur turpis ut metus maximus pulvinar. Mauris a convallis ante, ut vestibulum urna. Praesent tincidunt urna ullamcorper, venenatis tellus quis, placerat augue. Cras ante purus, vestibulum sed suscipit a, ornare in nisl.
Mauris in consequat dui, vel vehicula quam. Vivamus quis sem id neque convallis bibendum. Pellentesque dapibus, risus nec laoreet venenatis, justo lorem malesuada magna, a auctor massa nulla a massa. Maecenas in ligula fermentum, lacinia nisl eget, efficitur libero. Mauris eget dui ligula. Integer ultrices neque quis nulla pulvinar tempus. Suspendisse tempor ac lectus vel congue. Quisque quis lacus sed nunc semper luctus et ut velit. Ut laoreet, nibh eu semper tempor, nunc nibh feugiat lectus, et dapibus erat est at augue. Curabitur vel tristique quam, feugiat dapibus lectus.
Sed lacinia, neque vitae posuere ornare, turpis dolor faucibus erat, quis iaculis lacus massa eu velit. Cras facilisis tellus sed dui pharetra lobortis. Suspendisse elementum commodo ullamcorper. Sed porta arcu sit amet quam posuere placerat. Suspendisse iaculis dignissim magna, ut congue sem commodo et. Curabitur enim massa, placerat eu enim ac, feugiat rhoncus libero. Morbi vel luctus neque, quis feugiat justo. Donec cursus, mi eu varius fermentum, sem odio ullamcorper sapien, ac luctus nisl nibh et nibh. Curabitur pharetra vehicula tempor. Suspendisse porttitor dignissim feugiat. Maecenas at ultrices ipsum. Curabitur magna lacus, pulvinar sodales libero at, tempor dignissim ex. Nunc ut pharetra orci, sit amet feugiat nisl.
Donec aliquam pulvinar mi eu maximus. Nam quis eleifend leo. Pellentesque rutrum hendrerit posuere. Nam tellus ipsum, suscipit commodo risus non, congue faucibus metus. Proin sollicitudin enim eget leo sollicitudin finibus. Aliquam auctor dignissim ornare. Sed a ligula id tellus viverra fringilla ac at neque. Sed ut mi arcu.
Ut in consectetur arcu. Vestibulum mattis aliquet neque ut tristique. Etiam orci tortor, pretium non mauris vitae, sodales molestie nunc. Mauris et augue vitae arcu pharetra finibus. Suspendisse ante dui, vehicula non lorem vel, gravida semper metus. Suspendisse potenti. Curabitur pretium arcu elit, a feugiat purus viverra ut. Proin vitae convallis felis, et porttitor nisi.
Ut congue sed enim id fermentum. Mauris ut sagittis elit. Suspendisse dictum ultrices mi at commodo. Vivamus massa nisl, fermentum ac est quis, commodo consectetur risus. Integer sit amet mauris a odio ultrices hendrerit in vel urna. Nam suscipit auctor rhoncus. Donec placerat ultrices diam, vitae tincidunt felis malesuada in. Donec vestibulum magna turpis, tempus maximus ex ultricies at. Duis ut luctus ante. Morbi lectus velit, interdum a finibus ac, tristique in dolor. Nullam eleifend tempus lacinia. Vivamus congue eros ac arcu imperdiet, id elementum massa aliquet. Suspendisse eleifend, ipsum ac porta volutpat, turpis nisl eleifend nisi, eget feugiat lorem leo vel velit. Duis sit amet odio urna. Pellentesque quis euismod eros.
Curabitur quis porta lacus. Phasellus facilisis arcu sit amet risus mollis, at finibus urna scelerisque. Integer maximus dignissim enim vel maximus. Quisque eu justo quam. Nulla sit amet tortor risus. Cras a metus iaculis, vehicula arcu sed, molestie turpis. Quisque vitae justo vestibulum, convallis lectus eget, iaculis felis. Praesent ac dictum dolor. Sed arcu sem, pharetra in vehicula eget, aliquam non felis. Sed in fringilla dolor. Maecenas non efficitur sapien. In at tellus eu ipsum faucibus aliquam. Morbi felis enim, molestie nec nisl sit amet, viverra eleifend ex. Maecenas sagittis eget urna sit amet imperdiet. Donec imperdiet faucibus leo sit amet pharetra.
Integer tempus nulla sit amet enim luctus, sit amet pellentesque nunc bibendum. Suspendisse efficitur imperdiet euismod. In nec justo et velit ultrices volutpat. Integer imperdiet neque enim, id vestibulum enim bibendum id. Mauris eleifend leo quis orci mattis egestas. Praesent a lacus nec ante viverra sodales. Aliquam diam purus, feugiat vel lobortis a, fringilla ut nisl. Mauris ullamcorper dictum ligula, a cursus purus finibus iaculis.
Proin in erat urna. Integer ac tortor eros. Duis mattis varius volutpat. Ut pretium lectus quam, in sagittis lectus dapibus nec. Donec vestibulum tortor in ligula varius commodo. Fusce purus mi, consequat vel viverra vitae, vestibulum et arcu. Nulla facilisi. Cras eleifend vestibulum malesuada.
MethodDesignLorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Aenean quis bibendum nunc. Nunc a lacus maximus, elementum lectus eu, bibendum erat. Pellentesque iaculis cursus turpis a porta. Etiam eleifend, dolor ac euismod euismod, dui sem mollis purus, et aliquet sem orci in dolor. Praesent tincidunt non odio ut feugiat. In imperdiet eget enim at ultrices. Suspendisse tempus risus sit amet leo fermentum ornare. Duis vitae urna nec lectus commodo hendrerit ut a tellus. Phasellus hendrerit molestie mi non tristique. Proin quis mollis dolor. In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Fusce mollis mauris ac libero viverra, sed pretium lorem ullamcorper. Sed vestibulum enim ac risus efficitur, a gravida enim finibus.
ParticipantsLorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Aenean quis bibendum nunc. Nunc a lacus maximus, elementum lectus eu, bibendum erat. Pellentesque iaculis cursus turpis a porta. Etiam eleifend, dolor ac euismod euismod, dui sem mollis purus, et aliquet sem orci in dolor. Praesent tincidunt non odio ut feugiat. In imperdiet eget enim at ultrices. Suspendisse tempus risus sit amet leo fermentum ornare. Duis vitae urna nec lectus commodo hendrerit ut a tellus. Phasellus hendrerit molestie mi non tristique. Proin quis mollis dolor. In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Fusce mollis mauris ac libero viverra, sed pretium lorem ullamcorper. Sed vestibulum enim ac risus efficitur, a gravida enim finibus.
MaterialsMaterial 1Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Aenean quis bibendum nunc. Nunc a lacus maximus, elementum lectus eu, bibendum erat. Pellentesque iaculis cursus turpis a porta. Etiam eleifend, dolor ac euismod euismod, dui sem mollis purus, et aliquet sem orci in dolor. Praesent tincidunt non odio ut feugiat. In imperdiet eget enim at ultrices. Suspendisse tempus risus sit amet leo fermentum ornare. Duis vitae urna nec lectus commodo hendrerit ut a tellus. Phasellus hendrerit molestie mi non tristique. Proin quis mollis dolor. In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Fusce mollis mauris ac libero viverra, sed pretium lorem ullamcorper. Sed vestibulum enim ac risus efficitur, a gravida enim finibus.
Material 2Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Aenean quis bibendum nunc. Nunc a lacus maximus, elementum lectus eu, bibendum erat. Pellentesque iaculis cursus turpis a porta. Etiam eleifend, dolor ac euismod euismod, dui sem mollis purus, et aliquet sem orci in dolor. Praesent tincidunt non odio ut feugiat. In imperdiet eget enim at ultrices. Suspendisse tempus risus sit amet leo fermentum ornare. Duis vitae urna nec lectus commodo hendrerit ut a tellus. Phasellus hendrerit molestie mi non tristique. Proin quis mollis dolor. In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Fusce mollis mauris ac libero viverra, sed pretium lorem ullamcorper. Sed vestibulum enim ac risus efficitur, a gravida enim finibus.
ProcedureLorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Aenean quis bibendum nunc. Nunc a lacus maximus, elementum lectus eu, bibendum erat. Pellentesque iaculis cursus turpis a porta. Etiam eleifend, dolor ac euismod euismod, dui sem mollis purus, et aliquet sem orci in dolor. Praesent tincidunt non odio ut feugiat. In imperdiet eget enim at ultrices. Suspendisse tempus risus sit amet leo fermentum ornare. Duis vitae urna nec lectus commodo hendrerit ut a tellus. Phasellus hendrerit molestie mi non tristique. Proin quis mollis dolor. In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Fusce mollis mauris ac libero viverra, sed pretium lorem ullamcorper. Sed vestibulum enim ac risus efficitur, a gravida enim finibus.
EthicsLorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Aenean quis bibendum nunc. Nunc a lacus maximus, elementum lectus eu, bibendum erat. Pellentesque iaculis cursus turpis a porta. Etiam eleifend, dolor ac euismod euismod, dui sem mollis purus, et aliquet sem orci in dolor. Praesent tincidunt non odio ut feugiat. In imperdiet eget enim at ultrices. Suspendisse tempus risus sit amet leo fermentum ornare. Duis vitae urna nec lectus commodo hendrerit ut a tellus. Phasellus hendrerit molestie mi non tristique. Proin quis mollis dolor. In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Fusce mollis mauris ac libero viverra, sed pretium lorem ullamcorper. Sed vestibulum enim ac risus efficitur, a gravida enim finibus.
Analysis/ResultsLorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Cras pretium purus sed mollis accumsan. Phasellus pellentesque dignissim urna vel tristique. Phasellus vestibulum ac augue at egestas. Vivamus dictum dapibus bibendum. Pellentesque pharetra, libero quis ultrices venenatis, justo nunc imperdiet augue, in dapibus tortor dui in felis. Proin vitae accumsan quam. Aenean hendrerit suscipit leo. Mauris eu pharetra elit. In dignissim id nulla ut laoreet. Vivamus et enim sed tortor faucibus dapibus eu vel dolor. Ut a pellentesque eros, pulvinar vulputate enim. Morbi non metus enim.
Table 1.
This is where you insert the caption for your table. Do this by right clicking on the table and selecting Insert caption. This should describe the table for a reader, e.g., what are the values in parentheses? The text in the table should be sans serif (Ive used Calibri), this caption should be in the same font as the main body though.
Column Head Column Head Column Head Column Head Column Head
Row Head 123 123 123 123
Row Head 456 456 456 456
Row Head 789 789 789 789
Row Head 123 123 123 123
Row Head 456 456 456 456
Row Head 789 789 789 789
Note: This is the space for notes about the table purely optional
Suspendisse auctor commodo risus ac venenatis. Nam ornare mattis pharetra. Vivamus ullamcorper massa vel orci blandit pharetra. Nulla mattis egestas felis, et vulputate orci ornare ut. Morbi pulvinar viverra mi vel tempus. Etiam accumsan quam elit, sit amet posuere ante sagittis non. Donec et ligula quis mi aliquet facilisis aliquet ut libero. Pellentesque habitant morbi tristique senectus et netus et malesuada fames ac turpis egestas.
Aliquam ut enim rutrum metus euismod dictum non et libero. Integer ullamcorper velit egestas enim vestibulum ornare. Phasellus eget est vitae libero rhoncus facilisis sit amet at dui. Aenean euismod lectus urna, sit amet blandit turpis tincidunt ut. Sed ac ex tincidunt, pulvinar tortor at, dictum sem. Integer accumsan diam vel lectus sagittis accumsan. Proin egestas urna a mauris porttitor dictum. Nulla venenatis justo velit, lobortis iaculis mauris efficitur at. Nulla bibendum luctus erat a ornare. Quisque nec sem sodales, fringilla ipsum eu, suscipit ex. Nunc dapibus fermentum laoreet. Phasellus posuere elit eget mattis vehicula.
Figure 1. Figure captions go below, unlike table captions. They should describe the figure, don't just say a bar chart, important information should be here. E.g., what do the error bars represent. The text in the figures should be sans serif like tables, Ive used Calibri again.
Mauris lobortis urna quis nisi mattis iaculis. Donec cursus placerat tortor, in congue libero eleifend vitae. Aliquam erat volutpat. Nulla tincidunt sit amet turpis nec dictum. Morbi in metus at dui fringilla suscipit sit amet tincidunt nunc. Nunc suscipit placerat mattis. Praesent pellentesque rhoncus ligula et placerat. Duis ipsum felis, posuere pharetra pellentesque sed, ultrices in nunc. Nunc nisl massa, pulvinar eu tincidunt nec, cursus id justo. Pellentesque id nunc tincidunt, condimentum odio non, fringilla erat. Pellentesque aliquet volutpat neque rutrum ullamcorper. Curabitur quis quam ornare, dapibus sem nec, varius turpis. Nulla a molestie velit, et malesuada neque. Phasellus sed diam pellentesque, pharetra dui quis, tincidunt orci. Sed viverra varius risus. Aliquam ac turpis suscipit ligula ornare suscipit.
DiscussionLorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Donec erat ligula, euismod ac justo a, fringilla viverra ipsum. Nulla at ultrices nunc, ut auctor turpis. Sed convallis quis odio at pulvinar. Nunc facilisis elit vitae felis placerat rutrum. Praesent lacinia accumsan velit et maximus. Suspendisse nec maximus odio. Phasellus ullamcorper felis vitae aliquam laoreet. Curabitur nisl dolor, facilisis vel accumsan id, aliquet et libero. Phasellus ultricies sit amet ligula iaculis tincidunt. Proin blandit bibendum viverra. Nullam ut nisi vel nunc auctor dignissim eu ac lorem. Morbi quis pellentesque erat. In sed magna sit amet sapien dictum imperdiet eget lobortis odio.
Nunc a risus justo. Donec eu tempor lacus, ac pretium elit. Quisque iaculis, velit sit amet vestibulum tempor, metus ipsum vulputate sem, id lacinia ligula nunc at velit. Vestibulum bibendum hendrerit elit, a rhoncus neque dictum nec. Fusce ut pellentesque magna, et hendrerit turpis. Nam interdum elementum libero et eleifend. Quisque sit amet mauris in leo tempor congue vitae quis est. Donec at tellus mattis, varius elit viverra, laoreet elit. Nunc libero ipsum, ultrices vitae lacus ac, efficitur ullamcorper ante. Donec venenatis accumsan velit, nec rutrum felis hendrerit in. Nam tempus lacus imperdiet, auctor neque in, molestie tellus. Nullam lobortis lorem non lectus iaculis, eget feugiat justo faucibus. Curabitur volutpat nulla ac leo volutpat aliquam.
Nulla malesuada sodales sem ut cursus. Aliquam vel tortor varius, laoreet quam ac, dictum enim. Proin et nisl sit amet felis semper accumsan. Nam rutrum nec turpis non vehicula. Pellentesque pulvinar ut mauris vel dignissim. Praesent efficitur orci vitae ligula interdum finibus. Cras vel ipsum diam. Mauris ut volutpat nunc, ultrices efficitur nunc. Vivamus tincidunt sem ex, eu pellentesque leo lobortis in. Nam at ante a erat bibendum consectetur et in erat. Nam metus felis, maximus vel sodales eu, eleifend sit amet felis.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Phasellus a fringilla arcu, non suscipit sapien. Nullam dignissim tempor ipsum, vel imperdiet tortor faucibus et. Nullam ornare nec risus eu venenatis. Suspendisse potenti. Donec erat mauris, maximus consectetur risus eget, pellentesque venenatis orci. Donec malesuada, neque non euismod dignissim, dolor purus lacinia leo, sed rutrum nibh lectus et sem. Morbi et pharetra nunc. Vivamus nec erat ut arcu tincidunt laoreet ac nec velit. Vestibulum et molestie turpis, eu tempor dui. Mauris quis nulla arcu. Integer a neque vitae urna fermentum condimentum. Aenean sed bibendum purus, id pellentesque mi. Aliquam feugiat condimentum purus, ut gravida dolor venenatis vestibulum.
Sed interdum lectus et elementum aliquet. Nunc at tincidunt nunc. Mauris tristique, nunc vitae vehicula lobortis, quam magna ullamcorper enim, in molestie dui dui eu justo. Vestibulum sed pulvinar ligula. Cras condimentum, sem a auctor ornare, erat velit efficitur sem, at sodales dolor dui ac turpis. Nam vulputate leo sem, sed imperdiet urna aliquam nec. Sed ornare imperdiet dolor. Sed et sodales nunc, at egestas ipsum. Nullam in justo in sem dictum scelerisque quis id purus. Donec in diam aliquam, tristique lectus sit amet, blandit libero. Ut vehicula massa non venenatis porttitor.
Fusce non lectus ac odio fermentum lobortis. Sed non lorem in enim vulputate fringilla. Duis gravida velit id enim ornare, non ultricies tellus molestie. Proin diam nisi, placerat et sodales ac, tincidunt vel nibh. Fusce accumsan augue nunc, et rhoncus elit ultrices at. Phasellus ac ante eget odio tempor lobortis. Fusce eu felis malesuada, cursus nunc mattis, placerat lacus. Nullam risus ligula, malesuada tristique velit quis, rutrum cursus dolor. Nulla ante ligula, sagittis vitae ornare sed, malesuada ut justo. Proin nec mi at diam vulputate pharetra eget ac eros. Donec finibus vitae mi et molestie. Nulla aliquam nulla lectus, quis dapibus eros consectetur eu.
Pellentesque ornare purus aliquet orci mollis convallis. Cras feugiat enim ac sem iaculis, sit amet consequat ligula ornare. Aenean eget lobortis justo, et feugiat elit. Donec elementum velit sit amet aliquam egestas. Nullam magna nibh, volutpat vitae arcu ut, feugiat vehicula ipsum. Proin risus urna, elementum vitae feugiat eu, facilisis et nisl. Fusce quis tincidunt nunc. Nullam varius malesuada mi. Aenean ante mauris, ultrices vel purus sed, tempor vestibulum nulla. Mauris mollis nibh maximus, mattis massa sed, cursus sem. Curabitur varius est lacus, eget volutpat lacus vestibulum et. Nullam ac augue pulvinar nunc interdum aliquet sed eleifend eros. Phasellus fringilla feugiat magna, eget porta augue tincidunt et.
Aenean scelerisque velit ac nulla efficitur malesuada. Cras mi tellus, aliquet a neque quis, efficitur consectetur nunc. Nulla volutpat maximus faucibus. Nulla in blandit justo. Maecenas tincidunt elementum risus, vel mollis metus interdum eget. Etiam at justo consequat, dictum nunc ut, ornare massa. Cras sollicitudin congue est, sed suscipit purus auctor ac. Etiam sollicitudin nec libero at consectetur. Donec eu tellus urna.
Etiam elementum non libero sed viverra. Ut id cursus felis, nec scelerisque justo. Sed facilisis rhoncus rhoncus. Nunc libero purus, porta sit amet leo id, vehicula condimentum quam. Maecenas facilisis tellus tellus, non tempor diam ultrices sed. Ut vulputate pulvinar ornare. Ut pharetra interdum nisi, interdum dictum sem posuere vitae. Aliquam consequat euismod nisl, vitae fringilla enim dignissim vitae. Nunc pretium urna odio, sit amet rutrum ipsum porta ac. Mauris pellentesque, sem in fringilla tincidunt, ante ex aliquet nibh, eu volutpat sem sapien vel nunc. Aliquam vel posuere erat. In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Quisque sit amet libero purus. Sed ultricies arcu ac tempor ullamcorper. Mauris tincidunt purus vel aliquam tincidunt. Vestibulum ultricies id risus quis mattis.
Phasellus id feugiat nisl. Praesent eget commodo augue. Nulla efficitur dui nec placerat malesuada. Nunc posuere leo sem, vitae cursus lorem dignissim et. Suspendisse semper eros eros. Fusce interdum leo ut orci dapibus, elementum venenatis leo elementum. Aenean semper lectus non augue imperdiet, quis viverra ex aliquam. Fusce placerat ipsum orci, vitae elementum risus accumsan sit amet. Aenean eu nunc et elit ultrices congue. Mauris augue ante, varius ac ante eu, pharetra suscipit massa. Morbi bibendum neque eget molestie ullamcorper. Phasellus interdum lacinia scelerisque. Aliquam vitae quam at purus vulputate molestie eget id enim. Fusce dignissim eros a erat lacinia, id tempor libero feugiat. Maecenas non dui in eros dictum hendrerit vitae vitae mauris. Nulla facilisi.
References (in APA 7th)Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2008).Childhood education and care (No. 4402.0). Retrieved from http://www.abs.gov.au
Beckett, S. T. (2008).The science of chocolate(2nd ed.). Royal Society of Chemistry.
Branch, S., Ramsay, S., & Barker, M. (2008). The bullied boss: A conceptual exploration of upwards bullying. In A. Glendon, B. M. Thompson & B. Myors (Eds.),Advances in organisational psychology(pp. 93-112). Retrieved from http://www.informit.com.au/humanities.html
Cioe, J. (2012).The normal distribution[Lecture notes]. Retrieved from http://moodle.vle.monash.edu.au
Department of Health and Ageing. (2012).Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health performance framework 2012 report. Retrieved from http://www.health.gov.au/internet/publications/publishing.nsf/Content/oatsih-hpf-2012-toc
MacIntyre, S. (2008, August).Participation in the classroom, productivity in the workforce: Unfulfilled expectations. Paper presented at the 13th Australian Council for Educational Research Conference, Brisbane Qld. Retrieved from research.acer.edu.au/research_conference_2008/8
Preston, R. (2010). Observations in acute care: Evidence based approach to patient safety.British Journal of Nursing 19,442-447
Ramsey, J. K., & McGrew, W. C. (2005). Object play in great apes: Studies in nature and captivity. In A. D. Pellegrini & P. K. Smith (Eds.),The nature of play: Great apes and humans(pp. 89-112). Guilford Press
Sievers, W. (1966).Monash University[Photograph]. Retrieved from http://trove.nla.gov.au/work/15565401 q=monash&c=picture&versionId=18284000
Tranquilli, A. L., Lorenzi, S., Buscicchio, G., Di Tommaso, M., Mazzanti, L. & Emanuelli, M. (2014). Female fetuses are more reactive when mother eats chocolate.The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine, 27(1), 72-74. doi:10.3109/14767058.2013.804053
Winter, J., Hunter, S., Sim, J., & Crome, P. (2011). Hands-on therapy interventions for upper limb motor dysfunction following stroke.Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2011(6). doi:10.1002/14651858.CD006609.pub.2
Wolchik, S. A., West, S. G., Sandler, I. N., Tein, J., Coatsworth, D., Lengua, L., ...Griffin, W. A. (2000). An experimental evaluation of theory-based mother and mother-child programs for children of divorce.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68(5), 843856. doi:10.1037//0022-006X.68.5.843
AppendixAppendix ALorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut sagittis mi magna, feugiat bibendum turpis semper non. Phasellus id facilisis lectus. Proin ullamcorper dui eget erat facilisis fringilla. Praesent tempus nulla leo, sit amet convallis lorem finibus vel. Praesent ut maximus nisi, vitae tincidunt enim. Nunc egestas, justo nec venenatis venenatis, nulla erat molestie dolor, vel tempus mi felis a orci. Duis efficitur nulla neque.
Fusce elementum, diam vel rhoncus blandit, urna dui ullamcorper diam, at efficitur tellus mauris ut lectus. Praesent in purus sem. Sed sit amet mi dolor. Donec nisl elit, consectetur sit amet placerat non, blandit vitae erat. Nullam viverra arcu ac ipsum pretium, vel rutrum eros blandit. Cras iaculis vel libero rhoncus placerat. Suspendisse odio justo, malesuada et lectus in, eleifend euismod dui. Praesent turpis velit, laoreet id magna eu, congue rhoncus diam. Nullam maximus risus dolor, id hendrerit nunc placerat lacinia. Quisque consequat egestas neque nec porttitor. Praesent nibh metus, imperdiet ac euismod ac, maximus a dui.
Praesent fringilla facilisis quam eget aliquet. Quisque quis felis nulla. Phasellus gravida elementum erat, aliquam luctus libero scelerisque eu. Pellentesque a venenatis nisi, vel commodo nunc. Donec sit amet lorem ac ligula eleifend dapibus. Proin blandit varius maximus. Mauris a efficitur justo. Proin est odio, congue ac sodales sit amet, maximus sollicitudin ligula. Nullam efficitur tristique risus. Fusce cursus, turpis at viverra fermentum, odio nulla aliquet ante, at interdum tortor risus sit amet lectus. Nam mattis, leo quis vestibulum cursus, massa lorem fermentum nibh, eu finibus diam tellus ut ligula. Morbi elementum fringilla turpis in suscipit.
Appendix BLorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Vestibulum eleifend ullamcorper est, vel dapibus nulla. Quisque quam justo, dictum eget lacus porttitor, vulputate viverra ligula. Aliquam risus erat, commodo nec lobortis eget, mattis at augue. Morbi imperdiet, quam vitae gravida imperdiet, libero lorem tincidunt lectus, efficitur ultricies orci eros non leo. Nunc finibus leo ex, vel efficitur lacus ultrices sit amet. In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Sed euismod luctus felis vel auctor. Integer hendrerit, nisi ut vehicula ultrices, dolor arcu interdum libero, a sollicitudin leo felis eget enim. Maecenas consectetur semper libero nec maximus. Aliquam at interdum sapien.
Fusce condimentum vulputate tortor non facilisis. Vivamus nec fringilla tortor. Pellentesque habitant morbi tristique senectus et netus et malesuada fames ac turpis egestas. Donec tincidunt, felis id viverra bibendum, lectus enim malesuada purus, eget iaculis tellus nulla et sem. Interdum et malesuada fames ac ante ipsum primis in faucibus. Etiam vitae ante in sapien lobortis facilisis. Donec bibendum mi non felis iaculis, a ultrices urna scelerisque. Pellentesque sed justo auctor, pellentesque leo eget, scelerisque lacus.
Appendix Qualitative transcripts (only if conducting interviews/focus groups)
Int:Hello and welcome to my study
Judy:Hi and thank you for having me
Appendix Library Waiver (please complete)
101600254000
UCEEL Copyright Waiver
Student Name:
Project/Thesis Title:
Course:
Student Agreement
I confirm that Birmingham City University can electronically archive and make accessible the project / thesis described above via the UCEEL Electronic Library system. I retain all other ownership rights to the copyright of the document / project work described above.
I confirm the above project / thesis is a true and unaltered representation of the project / thesis as submitted to Birmingham City University course tutors and examiners.
I confirm that the above project / thesis includes / does not include (please delete as appropriate) material copied from a source (e.g. a book) where ownership of the copyright does not belong to myself.
If the project / thesis includes such material please supply the following details:
a) Page reference / item reference:
b) I have obtained and attached a written permission statement from the owner(s) of each third party copyrighted matter included in my project / thesis
Yes No (please circle)
(If No, I understand the electronic copy of my project / thesis available on UCEEL will omit these sections from view)
Signature:
Print Name:
Date:
N.B. If you are at anytime in consultation with a publisher regarding this work you will need to declare the copy held on UCEEL. Some publishers may regard the UCEEL copy as constituting prior publication. The copy can be removed from UCEEL if it becomes an obstacle to future commercial publication.
Official Use only
ORION unique number:________________Date added to the system:________________
IS228a/Oct07
2910840-23241000
FACULTY OF BUSINESS, LAW AND SOCIAL SCIENCES
SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES
UNDERGRADUATE / POSTGRADUATE DEGREES
COURSEWORK FRONT SHEET
MODULE TITLE:Integrative Psychology Project (Dissertation)
MODULE CODE:PSY6097
LECTURER:Dr Simon Snape & Dr Sophie Jackson
ISSUE DATE:18th September 2023
HAND IN/PRESENTATION DATE: 26th April 2024 at 3pm
HAND BACK DATE:11th June 2024
ASSESSMENT 3: Dissertation Report
Learning Outcomes:
Module Learning outcomes:
Formulate research questions and appropriate design based on methodological rationale.
Justify, critique and synthesise their own research in the light of existing psychological literature.
Analyse, appraise and communicate the findings of their research effectively.
Conduct ethical research in an autonomous, organised and timely manner under supervision.
Summative Assessment Overview:
Dissertation (75%) (7,000-10,000 words)
The Dissertation should be a full research report comprising of:
Title page
Abstract
Literature Review
Method
Analysis
Discussion
References
Appendices
This will assess LOs 1, 2, 3 & 4.
For guidance on writing up each section of your dissertation, please refer to the following sources of information:
Moodle documents
Formative feedback from your supervisor
Taught sessions will discuss requirements for meeting the learning outcomes at different levels.
The word count for this assessment is 7,000-10,000 words. You are granted a +/- 10% margin for the word count, so you have an advised lower limit of 6300 and an upper limit of 11,000. If you go beyond the additional 10%, your marker will stop reading and the rest of your submission will not be marked. This may impact the grade you achieve.
Formative Assessment:
Draft sections of the Method, Literature Review and Results/Analysis chapters are to be uploaded to formative submission points on Moodle. Formative feedback will be provided by your supervisor.
Formative Assessment Deadlines:
Method: Friday 8th December 2023
Literature Review: Friday 2nd February 2024
Results/Analysis: Friday 8th March 2024
Information for ALL students on submission of this coursework
All coursework must be in Arial size 11 or Times New Roman size 12
Please use APA referencing convention. For support please see the Official APA 6thedition website, Official basics of APA style tutorial and Official example APA reference listThe date and time of the submission of your work for this assessment can be found on your module Moodle site.
The word count for this assessment is 7,000-10,000 words to control for differences in design and analysis. Please adhere to the recommended word count as closely as possible. You are permitted to submit work that falls within 10% of the recommended word count. Failure to adhere to the word count will be taken into consideration when been awarded a mark, as the work has not met the assessment brief.
The word count includes everything from the beginning of the literature review to the end of the discussion chapter. The abstract, table of contents, reference list and appendices are all excluded from the word count.
You are reminded of the Universitys Disciplinary Procedures that refer to plagiarism. A copy of the Disciplinary Procedure is available from iCity. Except where the assessment of an assignment is group based, the final piece of work that is submitted must be your own work. Close similarity between assignments is likely to lead to an investigation for cheating. You must also ensure that you acknowledge all sources you have used. Submissions that are considered to be the result of collusion, plagiarism or misuse of AI will be dealt with under the Universitys Disciplinary Procedures, and the penalty may involve the loss of academic credits. If you have any doubts about the extent to which you are allowed to collaborate with your colleagues, or the conventions for acknowledging the sources you have used, you should first of all consult module documentation and, if still unclear, your tutor.
This assessment brief should be read in conjunction with the BCU FAQs on the use of AI tools from the Centre for Academic Success,
Additional information about electronic submission
All coursework submitted electronically need to be submitted in accordance with the following guidelines:
Submission means that a correctly formatted electronic copy has been submitted in the correct method via Moodle, by the deadline set. Failure to do so may result in a mark of zero being awarded
Your work must be submitted via Moodle - please refer to the Module Moodle site for further details on where to upload your work
It is your responsibility to ensure that your work is successfully submitted. You will receive an email receipt confirming your submission. Please check this and keep it for your reference
For essays, reports and portfolios your work must be submitted using a Microsoft Word file format (.doc or .docx)
For posters and presentations, your work should be submitted using Microsoft PowerPoint
Submissions using file formats other than those listed above may affect your work being marked, and the feedback you may receive
The work you submit must not be password protected
Coursework sent other methods e.g. Email will not be accepted
You must retain an electronic copy of your work. Failure to produce a copy on request will result in a mark of zero for the assessment task.
You can use the Turnitin at BCU Moodle page to learn more about software that assists in detecting collusion and plagiarism. On this page you can upload a draft of your work to view a Turnitin Originality Report
Penalties for late submission
At time of publication the rules regarding late submission of work are:
Assessments submitted up to 1 hour after the published deadline will receive no penalty.
Assessments submitted between one and 24 hours after the published deadline will be reduced by 5% of the actual mark given by the tutor.
Assessments submitted between 24 hours and five working days after the published deadline will be reduced by 10% of the actual mark given by the tutor.
Work submitted more than five working days after the published deadline will not be marked and the student will be deemed to have failed an attempt at the assessment.
If a student has a support statement specifying additional time to complete coursework, the penalties will only apply from the alternative deadline provided by the statement.
Importance of Taking Assessments
It is important that you complete your assessment, otherwise it is classed as a failed attempt (unless you have made a successful EC claim relating to Extenuating Circumstances).
If you fail any of your modules you will have to re-take it, although there are limits on the number of times that you can re-take and you may even have to re-study a module you have failed. Having to re-sit or re-study modules means that your workload will be increased and you will be putting yourself under more pressure. You may even be liable to incur more fees if you are required to re-study a module.
The university does appreciate that there are times when you may be unable to take an assessment due to circumstances outside your control such as illness. If this is the case you need to make a formal claim for an extension or deferral, as without this you are expected to submit within the standard guidelines.
No tutor, module leader or course leader can grant any form of extension to the published deadlines - this is done by a separate team within the university to ensure consistency and fairness for all. For full guidance on what constitutes an exceptional circumstance and how to make a claim, please visit the Extenuating Circumstances page on iCity; you can also contact the Student Support Team for help.
If you have a Support summary that tutors must take account of when marking your work, please check the appropriate box on the coversheet. Contact Enablement and Wellbeing for further advice if required https://icity.bcu.ac.uk/student-affairs/health-and-wellbeingIf you are experiencing problems, you should contact Student Affairs staff via https://icity.bcu.ac.uk/essentials/supportMarking
Marking is completed using the marking grid provided on Moodle. The detailed mark scheme identifies what percentage each LO contributes to the overall grade, and what percentage each marking criteria contributes to the LO percentage. For this assessment, each of the assessed LOs contribute 25% to the overall grade.
To ensure clarity and transparency about how each of the criteria for each class of grade can be achieved, you should read through the descriptors on the detailed mark scheme. The marking criteria will be discussed further in class to ensure transparency of the process.
Transferable Skills
This module will assist in the development of the following transferable skills:
Transferable Skill 1: Independence
The dissertation module is assessed by an independent psychology research project which you are expected to design, conduct and write up independently with guidance from your supervisor. The dissertation research is your own research project therefore you will be looking to work independently.
Transferable Skill 2: Critical thinking and problem solving
The dissertation requires critical thinking and problem solving in a number of areas: Firstly, you will need to critically analyse existing literature in your chosen topic area in order to identify a gap in knowledge. You must then use the skills and knowledge you have gained throughout your degree programme to date to problem solve (address the gap you have identified) and design appropriate empirical methodology to answer your research question. Once you have completed your study, you must then critically evaluate your own work the discussion chapter centres around a critical discussion of your findings, how they relate to previous literature and theory, what worked well and what could be improved, and what questions remain unanswered. Being able to think critically throughout all stages of the dissertation is key to success and this is something which should not be overlooked when discussing critical thinking and problem solving in relation to job applications.
Transferable Skill 3: Self-awareness
The dissertation requires you to be aware of your own skills and abilities at various stages. Self-awareness is critical in planning your project as you need to ensure that you are planning something that you are capable of, both in terms of your skills and abilities but also in terms of the time you have to complete the project and your own time management.
Transferable Skill 4: Teamwork
The dissertation is largely an independent project but you will be encouraged to work as a team of researchers within the department of Psychology and across the University when using things like equipment and lab spaces on campus and when interacting with your dissertation supervisor. These resources are limited and you will need to consider other peoples needs as well as your own. You will also have the opportunity to discuss your dissertation and your progress with your peers in group sessions such as the dissertation conference and the writing retreat.
Transferable Skill 5: Communication
Both written and verbal communication are assessed on the dissertation module. As a developing researcher and academic, your ability to communicate your research is paramount. On the dissertation module, you will be assessed in two ways on your communication skills. Firstly, the dissertation conference assessment (worth 20% of your module mark) will assess both your written (in terms of the poster content) and verbal (in terms of your presentation) communication of your research design and proposed plans. Secondly, the final dissertation will assess your written communication skills in terms of the dissemination of your research design and findings.
Transferable Skill 6: Ability to work under pressure
The dissertation is without doubt the largest piece of work you will complete whilst studying for your undergraduate degree. The module has been carefully designed so that you can work on one section at a time. As long as you stick to the formative deadlines and dates set out in the key dates document, you should be able to organise your time effectively so that you are not too stressed. Nevertheless, the dissertation comes with a huge amount of challenges and you will need to be able to manage in order to succeed.
Transferable Skill 7: Planning and time management
It goes without saying that the dissertation requires an immense amount of planning and time management from be beginning of the module through to your final submission date. The dissertation sits alongside your lectures, seminars and assessments for your other modules and runs throughout the academic year. As such, you will need to be able to manage your time effectively in order to manage competing deadlines and stick to the advised timeline for the module.
Transferable Skill 8: Leadership
You are the principal investigator in your dissertation and are leading your own project. You will be required to build professional working relationships with academic staff including your supervisor (who you will effectively have to manage), your module leaders, administrative and technical staff and other members of the research community within the department, as well as your participants. You will need to manage your relationship with relevant parties and lead your participants through your study carefully, manage your data following the ethical guidelines of BCU and BPS, and lead the discussions regarding your project with your supervisor.
Methodology
Participants
Eighty male participants were recruited for the study within the age range of 18-24. Participants were voluntarily recruited to allow for participation from a wide range of demographic groups, through social media and the Research Participation Scheme (RPS). Those who participated through the RPS were rewarded with research credits upon completion of the study. All participants were self-identified frequent users of Instagram to provide a more distinct understanding of the influence of Instagram on young males body image and self-esteem. Those who find the topics of body image and self-acceptance distressing were encouraged not to take part.
Design
This quantitative study used a cross-sectional research design to examine how young males' opinions of their bodies and eating behaviours are affected by Instagram. Instagram usage was measured firstly, using The Multidimensional Instagram Intensity Scale (MFIS) Mantzios & Keyte (2018). Body image acceptance and mindfulness levels were then tested for using the Body Image Acceptance and Action Questionnaire-5 (BI-AAQ-5;Basarkod, Sahdra & Ciarrochi, 2018) and the FFMQ-15: 15-item Five-Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire Baer et al. (2012). The independent variable was Instagram usage, with the dependant variables measured being body acceptance and mindfulness.
Materials
The Multidimensional Instagram Intensity Scale (MFIS) Mantzios & Keyte (2018)- the scale (see appendix) was completed to measure Instagram usage and dependence. The scale is divided into four categories, acknowledging that individuals can use Instagram due to persistence (e.g., If I could visit only one site on the Internet, it would be Instagram), to relieve boredom (e.g. When Im bored, I often go to Instagram), for self-expression (e.g. I like refining my Instagram profle), and overuse (e.g. I spend more time on Instagram than I would like to). It has a total of 13 similar statements with the frequency measured on a Likert scale of 1-5, with 1 being never and 5 being always. (Cronbachs alpha)
The FFMQ-15: 15-item Five-Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire Baer et al. (2012)- the questionnaire (see appendix) was given to participants to complete to measure mindfulness and self-awareness. This measure is a short form of the 39-item FFMQ (Baer et al., 2006). It includes the same five facets as the long form: Observing, Describing, Acting with Awareness, Non-Judging of inner experience, and Non-Reactivity to inner experience. The 15-item FFMQ (FFMQ-15) includes three items for each facet. Sample statements include, Im good at finding words to describe my feelings and When I have distressing thoughts or images I am able just to notice them without reacting.
TheBody Image Acceptance and Action Questionnaire-5 (BI-AAQ-5;Basarkod, Sahdra & Ciarrochi, 2018)- the questionnaire (see appendix) was completed. It is a short form of theBody image Acceptance and Action Questionnaire(BI-AAQ) which aims to assess body image acceptance. The BI-AAQ-5 is a 5-item scale where responses are recorded using a 7-point Likert scale (1 = Always true and 7 = Never true). Sample items include:Worrying about my weight makes it difficult for me to live a life that I value, I shut down when I feel bad about my body shape or weight
Procedure
Potential participants were provided with a link which brought them to a participant information sheet (see Appendix), outlining the study and the participants right to withdrawal and confidentiality. Potential helplines were also highlighted as well as researcher contact details. Participants who agreed to continue were then directed to a participant consent form (see Appendix), which was signed to indicate their voluntary participation. After this, the above-mentioned scales were completed followed by a debrief sheet (see appendix). This was done to once again remind participants of the aims of the study and of researcher contact details, as well as to thank them for their participation.
Ethics
Ethical approval was granted by the Birmingham City University Ethics Committee. All participants were aged over 18 and were made to understand any potential risks and discomfort they may encounter whilst taking part in the study, before giving their consent. Those who felt they could be affected were encouraged not to take part. Additionally, it was emphasised that a straightforward and readily available route was given for participants to leave at any time without facing repercussions. Contact details for related mental health support services were also given. These steps were included to put participant welfare and ethical standards first throughout the whole study process.
Running Head: CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN PERCEPTUAL LEARNING
From East to West: Cultural Differences in Perceptual Learning
Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of BSc (Hons) Psychology of Birmingham City University
Date of submission: May 2017
CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN PERCEPTUAL LEARNING i
Abstract
Cultural systems can influence cognitive processes such as perceptual learning (Bang, 2015). The Glass (1969) pattern discrimination task allows a comparison in perceptual learning processes between individualistic and collectivistic cultures. Forty participants of different cultural backgrounds consisting of international (collectivistic) and European
(individualistic) students were tasked with discriminating between radial and concentric
Glass patterns while response accuracy and reaction times were measured. Singelis (1994) self-construal scale (SCS) was also used to examine whether differences in perceptual learning was influenced by independent or interdependent cultural values. As predicted, all participants had improved, indicating that human visual systems were capable of extracting global forms percepts like the Glass patterns. International students had greater improvements in response accuracy compared to individualistic participants (p = .047), reflecting the tendency of collectivistic cultures for attending to global information. However, there were no significant differences between both groups when the data from each individual run was compared. The SCS also did not provide evidence of self-construal differences in behavioural performance. The lack of significant findings could be due to processing errors and other confounding variables. Further research is essential for uncovering new knowledge on cultural group differences in neural mechanisms, cognition and behaviours.
Keywords: culture, perception, learning, Singelis, self-construal, Glass patterns
CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN PERCEPTUAL LEARNING iii
Table of Contents
Abstract i
Acknowledgements . ii
Table of Contents iii List of Tables and Figures ... iv
Introduction . 1
Method 11
Participants . 11
Design . 11
Materials . 12 Procedure .... 14
Ethical Considerations .... 15
Results . 16
Discussion .... 23
Conclusion ... 34
References 36
Appendices ... 51 CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN PERCEPTUAL LEARNING iv
List of Tables and Figures
Tables
Table 1: Response Accuracy across the Sample Population ...... 16 Table 2: Reaction Times across the Sample Population .... 18
Table 3: Response Accuracy of Individualistic and Collectivistic Groups 19
Table 4: Improvements in Response Accuracy .. 21
Figures
Figure 1: Percentages of Response Accuracy across the Sample Population 17
Figure 2: Behavioural Data of Individualistic and Collectivistic Groups .. 20
Figure 3: Improvements in Response Accuracy ..... 22
Figure 4: Behavioural Data of Independent and Interdependent Groups .. 23
Introduction
Cultural research provides empirical and theoretical insights on the diversity of human cognition and behaviours. There is a general consensus that culture influences and constructs our thinking and behaviours (Wang, 2016). Research has consistently demonstrated that people from individualistic and collectivistic societies exhibit differences in processes such as perception (Kastanakis & Voyer, 2014), attention (Zhang & Seo, 2015), memory (Alea & Wang, 2015), and self-construal (Han & Humphreys, 2016) which emulate their unique cultural systems and conventions (Bang, 2015). Evidently, individualism and collectivism are distinctive conceptual frameworks and worldviews which distinguishes one culture from another (Oyserman, Coon, & Kemmelmeier, 2002). Individualistic societies centralize on autonomy, individual goals and personal control, while collectivistic societies are characterized by common social units which share universal goals, values and features
(Schwartz, 1990). For example, the emphasis on the self and unique identities in European American culture facilitates the development of individualism, whereas the emphasis of interrelatedness and obedience to group norms in Chinese culture fosters collectivism (Wang & Fivush, 2005).
Individual attitudes towards interpersonal relationships lies within a spectrum which extends between independence and interdependence (Wang, Ma, & Li, 2015). The perception of the self as an independent or an interdependent entity can be defined as a self-construal (Singelis, 1994). For example, Asians develop self-construal that are interdependent due to the cultural emphasis on group goals whereas Westerners typically develop self-construal that are independent due to the emphasis on personal achievements (Cheek-&-Norem, 2016). Culturally dependent self-construal are typically reflected in behavioural and cognitive processes such as perceptual learning (Kuwabara & Smith, 2012). Therefore, several selfconstrual scales (SCS) were developed to assess how strongly people subscribed to cultural values and enable the attribution of behavioural and cognitive processes to these values
(Gudykunst et al., 1996; Leung & Kim, 1997; Singelis, 1994). For instance, Singelis selfconstrual scale (SCS) measures independent and interdependent self-construal to identify if cultural values mediate group differences in cognitive processes such as perceptual learning. Ma et al. (2014) applied the Singelis SCS in their investigation on cultural differences in brain activations during a series of judgement tasks. Medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) activity was predicted to be increased in Westerners due to its link with the encoding of self-relevant stimuli (Hans & Northoff, 2009). In contrast, temporoparietal junction (TPJ) activity was estimated to be enhanced in Asians due to its association with external perspective-taking
(Saxe & Kanwisher, 2003). The results revealed that the measure of interdependence on the SCS was positively correlated with TPJ activation, but negatively correlated with mPFC activations. Chinese participants who scored higher in interdependence exhibited greater TPJ activations during judgment of social attributes, whereas Danish participants had greater mPFC activations when making self-comparisons to a public figure. Interestingly, Ma et al.
(2004) also found that TPJ activity was strongly mediated by interdependent self-construal. Evidently, self-construal measures have a fundamental role in explaining cultural group differences in brain activity and cognitive processes.
Global and local processing operates in perceptual attention (Navon, 1977), however, individuals growing up in different sociocultural contexts adopt distinct strategies in information processing depending on the self-construal they adhere to (Han & Humphreys, 2016). Therefore, performing the same task involving the same stimuli can engage culturallymediated cognitive processes to identify differences in information processing. Visual scenes typically contain global and local information; global information refers to the complete visual form, while local information relates to the finer details (Neisser, 1967). The difference in processing style influences the ways in which people attend to global and local information (Wan, Yang, Liu, & Li, 2016). For example, Mok and Morris (2012) suggests that processing styles are culturally and situationally-induced. Lin, Lin, and Han (2008) revealed that priming independent self-construal in Chinese participants resulted in a greater tendency towards local processing whereas interdependence priming was associated with more global processing. However, the insignificance of the behavioural data in this study necessitates future studies which compares groups with existing inclinations towards individualist or collectivist values, as priming may be insufficient in altering behavioural responses. Wang, Oyserman Liu, Li, and Han (2013) concluded that interdependent self-construal priming facilitates attention to social context, whereas independent self-construal priming stimulates a self-focused state of mind. Taken together, self-construal measures are advantageous as it allows researchers to establish a relationship between cultural values and cognitive processes (Han & Humphreys, 2016).
Culture and the environment plays a critical role in shaping cognitive processes as such as perception and learning (Lotz & Sharp, 2017; Nisbett & Miyamoto, 2005). Perceptual learning occurs through the categorization of objects and properties with discriminable features, and this can be informed by prior exposure or experience (Pylyshyn, 1999). Learning allows the visual system to spatially focus attention on the most pertinent elements of a scene thus minimizing confusion in an informationally dense and variable visual field. According to Gibson (1963), perceptual learning occurs through a differentiation process whereby the perceiver learns to accurately attend to the informational elements of specifying variables while ignoring nonspecifying environmental variables. Specifying variables refer to independent elements of the visual property, while nonspecifying variables refers to the ambiguous environmental information surrounding the visual property (Rop & Withagen, 2014). Gibson and Gibson (1955) estimated that perceptual learning occurs through practice whereby the perceiver improves in their ability to select, differentiate and detect information from visual field. Withagen and van Wermeskerken (2009) designed a study aimed at identifying the differences in attention to specifying and no-specifying variables using a test of length perception. To record changes in information detection, participants were tasked with reporting the length of unseen rods while being given visual feedback after each estimation. It was found that participants responded to feedback in distinctive ways, whereby detection response, speed of detection and sensitivity to specifying information varied from one individual to another. A mere 20% of participants learned to identify the specifying information, while 40% demonstrated improvements despite failing to identify the specifying information. The remaining 40% neglected the feedback and continued to rely on nonspecifying information. Thus, it was concluded that there were indeed individual differences in perceptual capacity and the degree to which feedback was utilised to adjust sensitivity to useful informational cues. Therefore, individual and cultural differences in perceptual learning may be revealed through the variation in which informational variables are attended to (Jacobs, Runeson, & Michaels, 2001).
Information detection, gaze behaviours and susceptibility to illusory biases vary between cultures (van Doorn, van der Kamp, de Wit, & Savelsbergh, 2009). For example,
Chua, Boland, and Nisbett (2005) found that Westerners fixated longer on focal objects while
East Asians made more saccades to the surrounding information. Therefore, van der Kamp, Withagen, and de Wit (2013) hypothesised that East Asians were more susceptible to illusory biases in Judd-drawings compared to Westerners due to their propensity to attend to contextual information such as the background. Westerners were expected to be more attuned to specifying variables (central cues) due to their tendency to overlook contextual information. Judd (1902) drawings are variants of the Mller-Lyer illusion whereby participants are required to estimate the midpoint of a drawing. It was found that both groups were equally inclined to exploit nonspecifying variables in the pretest phase. Performance began to diverge during the practice phase as Westerners eliminated the illusory bias at a significantly faster rate after gaining feedback. This difference however disappeared posttest when performance converged and both groups begun identifying specifying-variables. Intriguingly, in the absence of feedback, Westerners possessed the ability to reduce illusory bias through mere practice, but East Asians could not reduce this bias regardless of the amount of practice thus evidencing the susceptibility of East Asians to biases. The differences in propensity and aptitudes to attune to informational variables between both groups hence provides evidence of cross-cultural differences in perceptual learning. However, the results of this study are argued to be rather weak and lacked power (van der Kamp et al., 2013). Evidently, further research is essential to contribute more concrete evidence of cultural differences in detecting informational variables to facilitate perceptual learning.
The informative variables in a perceptual task often varies in quality and utility, thus perceivers are often selective of the variables and features which are attended to (Withagen, 2004). Moreover, there are cultural variations in learning capacity, detection of information and susceptibility to illusory biases (Danks & Rose, 2010). Rivers (1905) attributes this variability to a difference in directing attention. For example, Western civilizations are more field-independent and predisposed to analytic systems of thought which relates to structured, logical thinking as well as an inclination to focus on individual attributes of an object in order to form a complete mental representation of the whole object (Kitayama, Duffy, Kawamura, & Larsen, 2003; Nisbett, Peng, Choi, & Norenzayan, 2001). Contrastingly, Asian traditions advocates holistic thinking and field-dependency which entails a tendency to attend to a context as a whole, with a specific focus on the relationship between the focal object and its environment (Masuda & Nisbett, 2001). Jenkins, Yang, Goh, Hong, and Park (2010) identified that Chinese participants had significantly higher occipital activation when viewing incongruent scenes which have mismatched backgrounds and focal objects. It was suggested that the Chinese participants had increased sensitivity to backgrounds and were more adapted to the incongruent scenes compared to the American participants who were more fieldindependent. The concept of field dependency has been linked to the diversity in environments and perceptual orientations (Witkin & Berry, 1975). Thus, genetically similar individuals raised separately may behave according to the cultural context they grew up in (Boyd & Richerson, 2009). Gogtay et al. (2014) reported that the maturation of cortical regions implicated in perception such as the occipital and inferior temporal cortices occurs earlier than the brain regions involved in social cognition. Hence, it is assumed sociocultural environments shapes perceptual and attentional process.
Cuttings (1991) directed perception theory suggests that environmental contexts can influence the scope of information which is detected by an individual. Therefore, cultural variations in perceptual learning is suggested to result from exposure to different sociocultural and built environments (Nisbett & Miyamoto, 2005). An individuals schemata is cultivated from cultural-specific and individual experiences that occur throughout their life (DiMaggio, 1997). For example, Cai (2005) attributed variations in learning and processing styles to teaching methods whereby American classrooms encouraged independent criticalthinking while Chinese-classrooms emphasised consistency and uniformity. Additionally, Goh et al. (2007) postulated that visual acuity for either focal objects or contextual information enhanced with age. Humans develop abilities to process local and global forms of information in early childhood (Porporino, Shore, Iarocci, & Burack, 2004), and these perceptual systems continue to evolve and develop significantly throughout life (van der Kamp et al., 2013). Thus, it is evident that learning styles which cannot be genetically transmitted are reflections of culturally-influenced phenotypes (Chang et al., 2011). However, Kim and Sasaki (2014) suggested that genes do interact with cultural environments to shape behaviours and cognitive processes through a cultural adaptation process (Richerson, Boyd, & Henrich, 2010). Nevertheless, cultural adaptation occurs more rapidly than genetic adaptation, thus generating more stable behavioural variations among social groups (Boyd & Richerson, 2009).
Sustained exposure to specific cultural experiences and practices changes the volume of neural structures subsequently influencing cognitions and behaviours (Park & Huang, 2010). During the critical period in the first few months of birth, infants develop visual abilities though rewiring of their visual cortex which is shaped by the infants interactions with the environment (Morishita & Hensch 2008). Experience, expertise, socialization or identification with a cultural system subsequently regulates brain responses which is observable even during simple and abstract tasks, thus demonstrating the impact of cultural immersion on shaping perceptual systems (Hedden, Ketay, Aron, Markus, & Gabrieli, 2008). For example, Draganski et al. (2004) found that long-term training in juggling increased the volume of cortical tissue hence revealing the plasticity of the brain in response to environmental demands (Boyke, Driemeyer, Gaser, Buchel, & May, 2008). Visual and brain plasticity can be explained by visual perceptual learning (VPL) processes which aids in increasing long-term visual performance (Watanabe & Sasaki, 2015). Mayhew, Li, and Kourtzi (2012) measured EEG-fMRI signals of participants during a Glass (1969) pattern discrimination task before and after administration of training. Participants were tasked with classifying radial and concentric patterns which were presented in noisy backgrounds that induces sensory uncertainty. The EEG-fMRI and behavioural data revealed that learning had induced changes in the neural activation patterns of the higher occipitotemporal and parietal regions which are areas implicated in the integration and recognition of global visual forms.
There was also an increase in participants sensitivity to visual forms despite the perceptual uncertainties. Thus, it is evident that training facilitates experience-dependent changes in categorical decision processes despite any uncertainties due to shifts in participants internal categorisation criterions.
According to Gregorys (1970) top-down processing theory, higher-order cognitive information allows people to construct perceptions. Top-down processing relies on the individuals existing knowledge to formulate inferences about the perceived object (Gilbert & Li, 2013). Top-down recurrent processing is an essential component for perceptual learning as it allows individuals to integrate information from outside the classical receptive field (Meuwese, Post, Scholte, & Lamme, 2013). Moreover, recurrent processing has been suggested to shape perceptual representations over the course of learning (Kriegeskorte et al., 2008). However, Seitz & Watanabe (2005) argue that top-down processing is not essential for perceptual learning as VPL can occur through conditioning between the perceived stimuli and reward signals. The sense of accomplishment achieved from successful recognition of targets trigger internal reward signals, thus allowing perceivers to learn how to differentiate between the perceptual features in the visual stimuli (Kim, Seitz & Watanabe, 2015). Nevertheless, top-down recurrent processing remains vital as it may underlie aspects of rapid perception and discrimination of ambiguous visual stimuli such as the Glass (1969) patterns (Drewes, Goren, Zhu, & Elder, 2016). The Reverse Hierarchy Theory (RHT) also suggests that perceptual learning and improvements results from a top-down-guided process whereby attention is directed towards higher, then lower level task-relevant information (Ahissar & Hochstein, 2004). Irrelevant information which does not guide perception is pruned to filter external noise (Dosher & Lu, 1998). Therefore, although all perceivers may employ topdown processing in a perceptual task, research is needed to identify cultural group differences in the detection of task-relevant information.
A comparison of the VPL processes between individualistic and collectivistic cultures can be conducted using the Glass (1969) patterns category-discrimination task described in
Mayhew et al.s (2012) study. Glass patterns are neutral and cannot be associated with meaning thus providing robust evidence for cultural differences in perception (Miyamoto,
2013); this is also demonstrated in several studies which employs simple geometric stimuli (Doherty, Tsuji, & Phillips, 2008; McKone et al., 2010; Savani & Markus, 2012). Moreover, human visual systems are eminently capable of extracting global forms percepts such as radial and concentric patterns from the environment (Wilson & Wilkinson, 1998). According to the global precedence hypothesis, people have a cognitive disposition to grant processing priority is granted to global information (Mills & Dodd, 2014). Consequently, there is an increased likelihood that global information is responded to in a faster rate (global advantage) and detected more easily than local information (global interference). However, Davidoff, Fonteneau & Fagot (2008) argued that although global precedence was indeed more prevalent, there are some populations who were more inclined to local processing due to cultural mediation. Therefore, the use of an incidental processing paradigm whereby the global and local cues in the compound stimuli are uninformative (does not interfere with task performance) allows researchers to identify if global precedence is a stable phenomenon across cultures (Navon, 2003). The Glass patterns is hence used in this study as it allows a comparison of learning processes between individualistic and collectivistic cultures.
The expression practice makes perfect is widely accepted, albeit the existing gaps in literature which does not clearly explain factors underlying individual differences in learning variability (Santamaria, 2009). Previous research has established that learning can be influenced by factors such as repetition (Dahlin & Watkins, 2000), self-concepts (Lee, 2009), motivation (Ennen, Stark, & Lassiter, 2015), epistemological beliefs (Schommer-Aikins &
Easter, 2008), and feedback (Segedy, Kinnebrew, & Biswas, 2013) among others. Perceptual learning experiments typically employ trial-by-trial feedback (Fahle & Edelman, 1993; Mancini et al., 2016; Vallabha & McClelland, 2007) which has been associated with perceptual improvements. However, perceptual learning has also been revealed in tasks which did not provide external feedback (Petrov, Dosher, & Lu, 2005). The augmented Hebbian reweighting model (AHRM) provides an account of the dynamics of perceptual learning (Petrov, Dosher, & Lu, 2006). The model suggests that in the absence of feedback, learning occurs through the identification of interlocking patterns in a complex data set, thus increasing accuracy in ambiguous visual discrimination tasks. According to Gilbert and Li (2012), the visual system is influenced by experience and repeated practice, which subsequently leads to long-lasting improvements in basic texture discrimination and spatial acuity tasks. Pylyshyn (1999) further attributes the ability for improvement through practice to the neuronal plasticity of the primary visual systems. The plasticity of the visual system allows continuous evolution and enhancement of performance through an accumulation of visual experiences (Sagi, 2011). Therefore, perceptual accuracy can be attained through practice, feedback and by adjusting reliance on informational variables to diminish the effect of illusory biases (Michaels, Arzamarski, Isenhower, & Jacobs, 2008).
Present Study
Research is needed to identify the distinctiveness and universality of global learning processes to provide insights into the underlying neural mechanisms and systems of learning (Markus & Kitayama, 1991). Cultural influences on perception interacts with cognitive processes that facilitates behavioural performance in perceptual tasks (Park & Huang, 2010). Therefore, the present-study aims to identify the effects of culture on perceptual learning processes. It is estimated that the Glass (1969) pattern discrimination-task is useful for identifying cultural differences in learning through measurements of behavioural performance. As Asians have a greater tendency to attend to nonspecifying (global) variables compared to Westerners (Van der Kamp et al., 2013), they were expected to have better performance in the Glass pattern discrimination task which requires global processing (Davidoff et al., 2008). Therefore, it is hypothesised that individuals from collectivistic cultures such as Asia would show greater improvements in response accuracy and reaction times compared to individuals from individualistic cultures such as Europe who are more likely to focus on the local features of the Glass patterns. Research in this domain is important for broadening existing theories and knowledge of cultural influences on cognition and behaviours in varying contexts and situations (Bang, 2015).
Method
Participants
Forty participants (27 females; 13 males) with a mean age of 21.90 (SD = 2.63) from individualistic-and-collectivistic backgrounds depending on their country of origin and migration history were recruited through opportunity-sampling (Champion, 2002) or the BCU Department of Psychology Research Participation Scheme (RPS). Those who participated through the RPS were rewarded with research credits upon completion of the study. Individuals with dual citizenships or constantly live between countries for more than 6 months at a time were not permitted to participate in the study as they may have multiple cultural identities through their exposure to varying cultural contexts (Hong, Morris, Chiu, & Benet-Martinez, 2000). All participants had normal or corrected-to-normal vision and did not use special-coated eyewear.
Design
The present study employed a between-subjects design comparing two groups from different cultural backgrounds; half originated from a collectivistic society, while the other half were from an individualistic society. Among these participants, twenty were international students studying in the UK or lived in the UK for less than five years representing the collectivistic society, while the remaining twenty were British or European students representing the individualistic society. Response accuracy and reaction times of correct pattern identifications were recorded for each participant to enable a comparison of perceptual learning differences between individualistic and collectivistic cultures. Therefore, the independent variable in the present study was cultural background, while the dependent variables measured were response accuracy and reaction times.
Materials
Demographics questionnaire. The questionnaire (See Appendix A) which identified background information such as nationality, gender, age, language abilities, ethnic background, birth place and years lived in the UK was completed to ensure participants were assigned to the corresponding experimental conditions (collectivistic or individualistic).
Self-construal scale. Singelis (1994) 24-itemed Self-Construal-Scale (SCS; See Appendix B) was completed to further illustrate and strengthen evidence of independent or interdependent self-construal differences between both experimental conditions. It allowed definitive attributions of differences in physiological and behavioural responses to cultural values and identities (Han et al., 2013). The SCS consisted of items such as I enjoy being unique and different from others in many respects and speaking up during a class is not a problem for me which measured independent self-construal, while items such as I have respect for the authority figures with whom I interact and I respect people who are modest about themselves measured interdependent self-construal. Participants responses were measured on 7-point Likert scales which ranged from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 7 (Strongly
Agree). Cronbachs alpha () reliabilities for the scale was .619; Specifically, values for the 12 independent and 12 interdependent items were .660 and .682 respectively. The validity of the SCS has also been established through interethnic comparisons (Singelis et al., 1995).
Glass (1969) pattern stimuli. Participants were tasked with discriminating radial and concentric Glass patterns to compare perceptual learning processes between individualistic and collectivistic cultures. Each stimulus consisted of pairs of dipoles comprised of two dots (2.3 2.3 arc min2) displayed within a square aperture (7.97.9) against a black background (100% contrast) to allow for reliable and coherent perception (Wilson & Wilkinson, 1998). Concentric patterns were formed by tangentially-placed dipoles, while radial patterns were constructed by orthogonally-placed dipoles.
In the present study, radial patterns were generated using a spiral angle of 0 whereas concentric patterns were generated using a spiral angle of 90 (See Appendix C). These spiral patterns were generated with 35% and 40% signal, and rotated clockwise or anticlockwise across trials in a randomized order. Spiral angles were jittered randomly in their position between presentations of each stimulus (3) to ensure that participants would learn to discriminate global shapes rather than just local features during stimulus categorization (Garcia, Kuai & Kourtzi, 2013). The addition of local orientation jitter increases ambiguity of the direction in which a dots correspondence lies in (Dakin, 1997). As the range of the jitter during each pattern transition does not exceed 11, it does not significantly affect perception of the structure (Maloney, Mitchison, & Barlow, 1987). Psych Toolbox 3 software was used in conjunction with MATLAB to generate the Glass patterns and to record the response accuracy and reaction times of correct pattern identifications.
In addition to the experimental phase, the experiment consisted of an additional familiarisation phase where participants were presented with an image of the sun to illustrate radial patterns, and an image of a target to illustrate concentric patterns. The trials in the familiarisation phase were time-constrained in the same way as the experimental trials to ensure that participants were aware of the actual speed of the experimental runs. Initial familiarisation was also important to ensure that participants responses in the experimental runs were automatic and depended solely on perceptual judgement. Participants were then required to complete a total of four experimental runs. Each run constituted a total of 164 trials which was randomized between two stimulus conditions (radial and concentric) and one fixation condition, with 54 trials per condition. The order of trials was matched for history, such that each trial was equally likely to be preceded by any of the conditions. Two additional trials were added in each run to balance the history of the second trial; these were excluded in the final analysis. A fixation dot was displayed in the centre of the screen for 3 seconds during the fixation trials, whereas the stimulus trials consisted of a 200 ms stimulus presentation followed by a 1300 ms fixation. A + response cue (see Appendix D) appeared for 1000ms to prompt participants to identify the pattern using the relevant key-presses on the keyboard. Participants used key-press 1 for radial patterns and key-press 2 for concentric patterns. A 500 ms fixation dot was displayed on the screen before the next trial onset. There was also 3s fixation periods at the beginning and end of each experimental run.
Equipment. All experiments were carried-out in a dark room. The stimuli were displayed on a 22 Lenovo ThinVision coloured monitor which had a resolution of 19201080-pixels and a frame refresh rate of 60Hz. The monitor was kept at a comfortable viewing distance of 20 from the participant (Yan, Hu, Chen & Lu, 2008).
Procedure
Participants were presented with a participant information sheet (See Appendix E) which described the purpose of the study as well as the rights of participation. A consent form (See Appendix F) was then signed and dated to indicate voluntary participation. The demographics questionnaire and SCS were subsequently completed, and instructions for the experiment were thoroughly explained to the participants. Participants were assigned to either the Eastern collectivistic condition or the Western individualistic condition depending on the background information listed in the demographics questionnaire.
Participants began the experiment with an initial familiarisation phase which consisted of 15 mock presentation trials of the sun (radial) and a target (concentric) to familiarize themselves with the key-presses used in the categorization task. Results were not recorded during this session. Once participants had been exposed to the experimental paradigm, four experimental runs were carried out. Response accuracy (number of correct pattern identifications) and reaction times of the correct identifications for each participant were recorded. Participants were debriefed upon completion of the experiment to explain the true purpose of the experiment as well as the need to withhold this information to reduce demand characteristics which may bias the results of the study (See-Appendix G).
Ethical Considerations
Ethical approval was granted by Birmingham City Universitys Ethics Committee (See Appendix H). Due to the cultural diversity requirements in this study, participants who did not speak English as their first language were ensured to have fully understood the study by having a translator present when needed. Participation was only permitted to those aged above 18 years. Those who disclosed any visual impairments or could not look at computer screens for long periods of time were also advised to refrain from participation. Participants were allowed breaks of 60 seconds per run (164 trials) with a longer break of 180 seconds halfway through the experiment to avoid fatigue. A well-trained researcher was present throughout the experiment to monitor and ensure progress of the experiments.
Results
Perceptual learning was assessed by measuring the response accuracy in discriminating the radial and concentric Glass (1969) patterns. Reaction times were also recorded to ascertain if participants had improved in the rate of making correct identifications. A four-step procedure was used to analyse the response accuracy and reaction time data. Firstly, an analysis was conducted to identify if there were improvements in response accuracy and reaction times across the four runs among all participants (N = 40). Assumptions of normality were met in all four runs except for the response accuracy data in Run 1 (See Appendix I). As seen in Table 1, there were gradual improvements in response accuracy as the runs progressed, and all participants had improved by the fourth run (M =
66.90; SD = 15.19) compared to the first run (M = 53.65; SD = 9.33).
Table 1
Mean, Standard Deviation and 95% CI of Response Accuracy Across the Sample Population.
95% Confidence Interval
Run Mean Standard Deviation
Lower
Upper
Response
Accuracy 1
2
3 52.65
59.30
63.53 9.33
14.57
14.78 49.64
54.68
59.18 55.66
63.92
67.87
4 66.90 15.19 62.09 71.72
A one-way repeated-measures ANOVA (Greenhouse-Geisser Corrected) showed a significant change in response accuracy across the runs, F(2.25, 87.55) = 19.94, p < .001, 2p = .338. This represented a large effect size. Post-hoc tests (Bonferroni correction) revealed that response accuracy of Run 1 differed significantly from Run 2 (p = .021), Run 3 (p < .001) and Run 4 (p < .001), indicating that there was a significant increase in number of correct identifications over the four runs as seen in Figure 1. Response accuracy of Run 3 also differed from Run 2 (p = .034), although there was no significant difference between run 3 and 4 (p = .163).
Figure 1. Percentages of response accuracy in detecting radial and concentric Glass patterns across the sample population (N = 40). Response accuracy was found to increase across the four runs. The error bars in the figure represents standard errors.
Reaction times of all participants in making a correct response was also found to decrease marginally as seen in Table 2, thus indicating that participants reacted more quickly as they progressed through the runs. A one-way repeated-measures ANOVA (GreenhouseGeisser Corrected) revealed a significant change in reaction times across the runs, F(2.21,
86.31) = 3.63, p = .027, 2p = .085. This represented a medium effect size. Post-hoc tests (Bonferroni correction) revealed that the reaction time of Run 4 significantly improved compared to Run 2 (p = .049).
Table 2
Mean, Standard Deviation and 95% CI of Reaction Times Across the Sample Population.
95% Confidence Interval
Run Mean Standard Deviation
Lower
Upper
Reaction Time 1
2
3 .536
.529
.518 .100
.111
.120 .504
.493
.479 .569
.565
.557
4 .505 .110 .469 .540
Once it had been ascertained that there was indeed difference in response accuracy and reaction times across the four experimental runs, the second part of the analysis was conducted to test the hypothesis and identify if participants from collectivistic societies (n = 20) had greater response accuracy and faster reaction times compared to participants from individualistic societies (n = 20). Table 3 shows that the mean response accuracy of the collectivistic group were generally higher than the individualistic group. Skewness for the response accuracy of the collectivistic groups were within acceptable limits (See Appendix J). However, data for the individualistic group was negatively skewed in Run 1, with a skewness of 1.10 (SE = .512).
Table 3
Mean, Standard Deviation and 95% Confidence Interval of Response Accuracy between Individualistic and Collectivistic Societies across Four Runs.
Background Run Mean Standard Deviation 95% Confidence Interval
Lower Upper
Individualistic
(British/EU) 1
2
3 51.75
56.25
57.40 11.603
10.716
10.389 46.32
51.24
52.54 57.18
61.26
62.26
4 63.75 8.039 59.99 67.51
Collectivistic
(International) 1
2
3 53.55
62.35
69.65 6.509
17.361
16.161 50.50
54.22
62.09 56.60
70.48
77.21
4 70.05 19.696 60.83 79.27
The collectivistic group was generally quicker and more accurate in discriminating the glass patterns, however, Figure 2 shows that the individualistic group had surpassed the collectivistic group in reaction times by Run 4. Nevertheless, to identify if there were significant group differences in response accuracy, a 2 (Background: Individualistic or Collectivistic) x 4 (Run: 1, 2, 3 and 4) mixed-measures ANOVA was carried out with background as the between-subjects factor and response accuracy of runs as the repeatedmeasures factor. Levenes test indicated that the assumption of homogeneity of variance was met for the first three runs, but violated for the fourth run (p < .001). There was an absence of a main effect of background on response accuracy, F(1,38) = 3.58, p = .066, 2p = .0.86, indicating that individualistic and collectivistic groups did not differ significantly in the number of correct identifications of the Glass patterns.
Figure 2. A comparison of response accuracy percentages and reaction times between individualistic and collectivistic groups. Performance of the collectivistic group were consistently better, although the individualistic group had faster in reaction times by Run 4.
However, there were no significant differences between both groups.
A separate mixed-measures ANOVA was conducted with background as the betweensubjects factor and reaction times as the repeated-measures factor. Assumptions of homogeneity of variance were met. However, there were also no main effects of background on reaction times, F(1,38) = .002, p = .965, 2p < .001, indicating that individualistic and collectivistic groups did not differ significantly in reaction times when making correct identifications. There were also no significant interactions between participants background with response accuracy (p = .081) or reaction times (p = .313) across the four runs.
The third analysis was aimed at identifying the differences in improvement rates between individualistic and collectivistic groups. Improvements in response accuracy were calculated by subtracting the scores in the first run (Run 1) from the final run (Run 4). Scores which did not show any improvements (Improvements < 0) were excluded from the analysis. As shown in Table 4, the collectivistic group (n = 15) had greater improvements in response accuracy than the individualistic group (n = 17). Assumptions of normality for the collectivistic groups were met (See Appendix K), however, data for the individualistic group was positively-skewed, with a skewness of 0.814 (SE = .550).
Table 4
Mean, Standard Deviation and 95% Confidence Interval (CI) of Response Accuracy between Individualistic and Collectivistic Societies Across Four Runs.
Individualistic (British/EU) Collectivistic (International)
n 17 15
Mean 14.41 24.07
Standard Deviation 10.22 15.05
95% CI (Upper Bound) 19.66 32.40
95% CI (Lower Bound) 9.16 15.74
There were greater improvements in response accuracy among the collectivistic group (M = 24.07; SD = 15.05) compared to the individualistic group (M = 14.41; SD = 10.22) as seen in Figure 3. An independent t-test showed that the difference between conditions was significant, t(24.21) = 9.66, p = .047, one-tailed. Levenes test indicated that the assumption of homogeneity of variance was violated (p = .047). The mean difference between conditions was 9.65 and the 95% confidence interval for the estimated population mean difference was between .149 and 19.16. The effect size was large (d = .765). However, there were no significant differences in reaction time improvements between individualistic and collectivistic groups (p = .224).
Figure 3. Improvements in response accuracy between individualistic (n = 15) and collectivistic (n = 17) groups. The collectivistic group had greater improvements than the individualistic group. The error bars represent standard errors.
The fourth and final analysis was carried out to identify if group differences in accuracy and reaction times could be attributed to participants self-construal (See Appendix
L). Singelis (1994) SCS was used to identify whether the participants had stronger inclinations towards independent or interdependent self-construal. Each participant had two scores, and were assigned with either independent or interdependent self-construal depending on their scores in each subscale. Scores were calculated for each subscale by summing up the responses and dividing the sum by the number of questions in the subscale (n = 12). More participants (n = 24) identified with an interdependent self-construal (M = 5.53; SD = .471) than with an interdependent self-construal (n = 16; M = 5.39; SD = .545). Figure 4 shows that the mean response accuracy of the interdependent group were generally higher than the independent group, while the reaction times for the interdependent group was consistently faster than the independent group across all runs. However, there were no significant group differences in response accuracy (p = .156) and reaction times (p = .079) between the independent and interdependent group. Hence the SCS was not used to attribute a cultural influence on perceptual learning differences.
Figure 4. Response accuracy and reaction time of independent and interdependent groups. Although the interdependent group had greater response accuracy and faster reaction times than the independent group across the four runs, these differences were not significant.
Discussion
The present study aimed to identify the effects of culture on perceptual learning processes using the Glass (1969) pattern experimental paradigm. Despite the ambiguity surrounding the Glass pattern stimuli, all participants were found to gradually improve in response accuracy and reaction time as the experiment progressed. Participants had learned to discriminate between the radial and concentric patterns, as reflected in the increased number of correct identifications by the fourth run. The participants reaction times had also became faster in response to practice and learning. These findings corroborate evidence of the capacity of human visual systems in extracting global forms such as the Glass patterns (Wilson & Wilkinson, 1998). As described in the global precedence hypothesis, global information is prioritised over local information, thus inducing observers to respond to the global information embedded in the Glass patterns to enable accurate discrimination (Mills & Dodd, 2014). Nevertheless, there is evidence of individual and cultural differences in the detection of global and local information.
To identify a cultural difference in perceptual learning and detection of informational variables, response accuracy and reaction times were compared between participants from individualistic and collectivistic societies. Collectivists were hypothesised to perform better than individualists in the Glass pattern discrimination task due to their cultural inclinations to employ global processing when perceiving visual scenes. As predicted in the hypothesis, international students from collectivistic backgrounds had greater improvements in response accuracy compared to the European students from individualistic backgrounds. The international students had correctly identified considerably more Glass patterns by the fourth run in comparison to the first run. Therefore, the findings of the present study echo van der
Kamp et al.s (2013) study which found that East Asians had greater tendencies to attend to global and contextual information, while Westerners tended to overlook this information. The findings also provide support for Hedden et al.s (2008) findings of increased activations in the prefrontal and parietal brain regions when East Asians performed context-independent tasks, and when Americans performed context-dependent tasks. Heightened prefrontal and parietal activity reflects unfamiliarity on a task, therefore, these neurobiological data provide further evidence that East Asians are more inclined towards context-dependent processing, while Americans prefer context-independent processing.
Jenkin et al. (2010) proposed that East Asians were more field-dependent, whereas
Westerners were more field-independent. However, contrary to Jenkin et al., the present
study found that individualistic and collectivistic participants had similar behavioural performance in the Glass pattern discrimination task. The results indicate that there were no group differences in the way that participants attended to the visual information within the stimuli. Although the collectivistic group had better response accuracy across the four runs, these scores were not significantly different from those of the individualistic group. An interesting point that was identified from the data (see Figure 2) was that the reaction times of the individualistic group had surpassed the collectivistic group in the fourth run, despite the latter having faster reaction times in the first three runs. It is estimated that the collectivistic group had internalised the Glass pattern stimulus features through learning. Therefore, they may have had slower reaction times in the fourth run to enable perceptual decision-making in identifying feature differences in the stimuli (Hansen, Hillenbrand, & Ungerleider, 2012). Besides that, although recurrent processing may enable rapid discrimination of ambiguous visual stimuli, it may be restricted to certain tasks (OReilly, Wyatte, Herd, Mingus, & Jilk, 2013). OReilly (2001) found that recurrent processing in simple tasks may incur minor deterioration of performance, as small processing errors are magnified over repeated interactions with the stimuli. Therefore, the collectivistic group who may have perceived the Glass pattern discrimination task as simple could have had more processing errors thus resulting in the slower reaction times in the fourth run compared to the individualistic group.
Singelis (1994) SCS was used in the present study to attribute the differences in behavioural performance to cultural values. Therefore, participants completed the SCS to assess how strongly they subscribed to their respective cultural traditions and values of independence or interdependence. As evidenced in several cultural neuroscience studies, selfconstrual influences are reflected in behavioural, physiological and psychological manifestations (Chiao, Cheon, Pornpattananangkul, Mrazek, & Blizinsky, 2013). However, the present study revealed that there was no significant difference in response accuracy and reaction times between participants with independent or interdependent self-construal. These findings contradict studies that elucidated the importance of self-construal in illustrating cultural differences in brain activity as well as cognitive and behavioural processes (Ma et al., 2014). According to Gudykunst and Lee (2003), clear patterns sometimes do not emerge in research on cross-cultural comparisons as the samples may not be representative of distinct individualistic and collectivistic systems. Individualism and collectivism exists in all cultures, hence, people typically conceive more than one set of cultural values. Although individuals typically have stronger inclinations towards one value to guide behaviours and cognitions, these cultural systems can shift in accordance to varying social contexts and interactions
(Hong et al., 2000). In addition, the validity of Singelis SCS has been questioned as it has received mixed feedback from various studies (Dowd & Artistico, 2016). For example, Levine et al. (2003) found persistent flaws in the SCS due to its instability and insensitivity towards cultural distinctions. Nevertheless, priming of independent and interdependent selfconstrual has been found to initiate changes in brain activation (Sui & Han, 2007). Therefore, self-construal scales remain useful in allowing researchers to make inferences and deductions of physiological or behavioural responses on cultural values.
Ahissar and Hochstein (2004) proposed that the Reverse Hierarchy Theory (RHT) was a powerful concept for explaining the relationship between visual learning and behavioural findings. Learning is attention-driven as the perceiver needs to attend to the relevant elements in the visual field. Hence, the RHT asserts that top-down processing allows the perceiver to gradually identify task-relevant information subsequently resulting in perceptual improvements. In short, perceptual learning occurs through repeated exposure to the stimuli, and the important information within the visual field is detected to enable effective discrimination of the Glass patterns. Participants had learned to discriminate between the global forms of radial and concentric patterns which were presented in short bursts. Due to the propensity of Westerners to attend to focal objects, the individualistic group of participants were likely to be perceiving the finer details of the Glass patterns, thus requiring more time to scrutinize the stimulus (Hochstein & Ahissar, 2002). In contrast, the collectivistic group were more likely to be attending to the contextual information of the stimuli, making it easier to detect these global forms (Markus & Kitayama, 1991). Therefore, measuring the speed of detecting changes in perceptual scenes is important as it allows researchers to identify the cultural differences in perceptual learning.
Several neurocognitive studies have evidenced the plasticity of the human brain as a result of learning (Costa & Sabastian-Galles, 2014; Galvan, 2010; Li, Legault, & Litcofsky, 2014). The ability of the human brain to functionally and physically reconfigure its structure has been hypothesised to be the outcome of environmental influence, behavioural experience and cognitive demand. However, Lehmann and Feldman (2008) argued that cultural adaptations on behaviour are weak and does not maintain persistence. Therefore, the lack of significant results in the present study could be due to the weakness of cultural influences on visual processing and perceptual learning abilities. Categorisation of individuals into groups has created an assumption that all group members share similar abilities, skills and interest without accounting for individual difference in history and experience (Gutierrez & Rogoff, 2003). A society is made up of individuals who actively express variations in their cultural identities and attitudes, thus resulting in individual differences in cognition and behaviour. Therefore, it is important to be cautious when generalising and interpreting results or observations. Although between-group differences may infer the presence of cultural elements at play, it can be traced to individual variations in goals, values and perceptions, indicating the importance of individual-level analysis in studying the dynamic systems of culture (Matsumoto, Grissom, & Dinnel, 2001). Hence, further research in this domain should consider the administration of cognitive screening and vision tests to account for individual differences and ensure participants possess similar cognitive abilities.
There are sometimes discrepancies in findings of cross-cultural studies due to the ambiguity of which neural processes are susceptible to cultural influences (Han et al., 2013). For example, the structure and organization of some cultures may be mirrored onto the processes of the brain more profoundly in some societies than others. Often, an individual exposed to a different host culture may develop distinct self-construal and cultural systems which are interchangeable and can be activated at different times and contexts through priming manipulations or social encounters (Brewer & Gardner, 1996). Moreover, the Glass pattern stimuli can be argued to lack any fundamental meaning, thus, differences in perceptions and judgements between both individualistic and collectivistic cultures may not be immediately evident in research data (Boduroglu, Shah, & Nisbett, 2009). Therefore, future research should attempt to advance this study from the functional neural level to the biochemical level by exploring the neurotransmitters and biochemical substances activity to identify their sensitivity to cultural processes. Nevertheless, Markus and Kitayama (1991) have advised that unexpected or discrepant outcomes within cross-cultural findings could still contribute to existing literature through identifications of the theoretical principles that explain these data discrepancies.
Despite the inconsistencies in past research, there remains definitive evidence of cultural differences in cognitive and behavioural processes (Alea & Wang, 2015; Kastanakis & Voyer, 2014; Zhang & Seo, 2015). In the present study, the lack of evidence of significant cultural differences in perceptual learning could be due to the systematic errors such as individual differences in memory, motivation and attention (Rensink, ORegan & Clark, 1997). The ambiguous Glass patterns which were degraded with noise leads to perceptual uncertainty, thus demanding more attention to enable the radial and concentric patterns to be identified. Therefore, a lack of focused attention during the discrimination tasks may cause the contents of visual memory to be overwritten by subsequent stimuli. Detection of stimuli features can only occur when attention is paid, as the absence of it may disrupt the information received or increase susceptibility to stimuli replacement (Pylyshyn, 1999). Moreover, transition from automatic to deliberative cognition sometimes requires shifts in attention, without which novel stimuli does not activate existing schemata (DiMaggio, 1997). The possible failure of some participants to attend to the ambiguous and novel discrimination task would explain why participants could not distinguish between the Glass patterns.
Research on cross-cultural differences are highly susceptible to confounding variables such as sociohistorical backgrounds, linguistic abilities, history and ecological differences (Grossmann, Ellsworth, & Hong, 2012). For instance, the international students in the present study may be influenced by acculturation whereby identification to the Western culture which could skew the results. Moreover, Kitayama et al. (2003) hypothesized that individuals such as the international students in this study who voluntarily immigrated to another culture may have psychological affinities to the culture they chose to live in. Besides that, an individual may amass multiple cultural identities through their immersion and exposure to varying sociocultural contexts and systems (Hong et al. 2000). To circumvent these confounds and improve internal validity, future studies should conduct testing on groups of people who have lived in more than one cultural environments. In terms of language which could act as a cultural prime, it is suggested that future studies should also use the native languages of each cultural group to minimize the effect of language processing. Taken together, activating or priming self-construal in cross-cultural research enables researchers to detect cultural group differences in behavioural performance or even brain activity across a variety of tasks (Han & Ma, 2016).
Cultural priming allows researchers to examine the relationship between cultural values and brain activity (Han et al., 2013). A priming procedure can be used to activate the attributes associated with the respective cultures. Priming does not alter participants scores on SCS as it does not change any cultural beliefs or system; rather, it activates the selfconstrual that is already existing in the individual. For example, Wang (2008) found that Asian American students who were primed to identify more strongly as Americans recalled more self-centred memories, whereas those primed with Asian identifies remembered more socially oriented memories. Wangs study therefore highlights the importance of examining the multiple interacting levels of culture to dissect how each level individual, community and global impacts upon behaviour. The multilevel systems of culture can be clearly identified among immigrants who have multiple cultural identities due to the integration of their own cultural norms with the cultural values of the host country. The individual differences in disposition consequently determines the individuals inclination towards the host culture or their culture of origin. Therefore, priming can be used to activate cultural knowledge to stimulate culture-consistent behaviours within individuals who have multiple sets of cultural knowledge. The intricate interaction of social, individual and situational factors governs the manifestation of culture in terms of behaviour, cognition and attitudes (Syed & Azmitia, 2010).
Due to the limitations mentioned above, it is evident that further studies are needed to expand the findings of the present study. Future studies should employ multimodal imaging whereby both neural activations and eye-movement patterns are measured to collect evidence of the cultural values that can influence structural and functional differences in people. Kitayama (2002) has also justified the insufficiency of self-reports and questionnaires in measuring true cognitive, emotional and psychological responses which are indeed rather spontaneous in nature. Thus, measures obtained from more advanced technology such as the eye-tracking, electroencephalogram (EEG), event-related potentials (ERPs) or functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) may be able to provide further validations of the occurrence of perceptual learning as it could capture relatively automatic or unconscious behaviour (van Gog & Scheiter, 2010). Cultural differences in perceptual learning remains a relatively unexplored domain despite the importance of recognizing how exposure to different cultural beliefs and social milieus can shape the brains malleable structure across an individuals lifespan. (Park & Huang, 2010). Therefore, further research is needed to explore cultural influences on underlying behaviours, thoughts and physiology.
Chua, Boland, and Nisbett (2005) proposed that the cultural differences in which people allocate attention can be studied through eye movements and perceptual judgement tasks. Advancements in eye-movement research has led to a paradigm shift and resurgence due to its diagnostic utility in understanding distinct psychological processes. Eye-tracking technology allows the detection of culturally modulated eye-movements through measurements of the duration and location of fixations on visual stimuli (Park & Huang, 2010). Moreover, automatic cognition depends heavily on culturally-dependent knowledge structures thus making it rapid and implicit. For example, Chua, et al. (2005) studied the effects of cultural influence on cognition by examining eye-movement patterns of East Asians and Westerners when perceiving visual scenes with a focal object and complex backgrounds. It was revealed that Westerners had longer fixations on focal objects compared to Chinese participants who also had more saccades to background scenes and shorter fixation durations on focal objects. However, these cultural differences in oculomotor control are not always replicated as Rayner, Castelhano, and Yang (2009) have identified in their study which found that there were no cultural differences in visual processing of odd elements of photographic scenes. Therefore, further research using eye-tracking methodology in addition to other advanced technology such as fMRI is essential to identify further evidence of cultural differences in perceptual learning, as well as to understand the underlying variables regulating eye-movements and gaze duration.
Park, Nisbett and Hedden (1999) emphasized the importance of ensuring that research is grounded in knowledge of neural structure functions to avoid errors in interpretation. fMRI studies can reveal cultural biases in neural activation patterns and differences in neural structures. Hedden et al. (2008) found that neural activations in specific brain regions were dependent on the individualistic or collectivistic values held rather than the cultural background. For example, East Asians who were acculturated to Western individualistic values showed stronger neural activation patterns in the ventral visual cortex which is associated with perceptual processing. These findings have demonstrated that cultural values are reflected in an individuals representation of self, subsequently shaping neural function and behaviours. Park and Huang (2010) added that an objective measure of basic cognitive performance is essential to verify that all participants are matched in terms of abilities such as processing capacity and working memory. Hence, any differences subsequently observed can be clearly attributed to cultural influences due to the elimination of these confounding variables.
Fahle, Edelman, & Poggio (1995) hypothesised that external response feedback was not essential for the occurrence of visual perceptual learning (VPL) as the featural-specificity of VPL was sufficient for learning to occur. However, due to the variation in information detection and learning capacity, feedback in learning may result in the divergence of participants perceptual performance (Withagen & van Wermeskerken, 2009). The availability of feedback is a key factor in perceptual learning as it is a determinant of whether learning occurs. Vallabha and McClelland (2007) believes that feedback improves the rates of learning, while Seitz, Nenez, Holloway, Tsushima, and Watanabe (2006) added that feedback was especially important for difficult perceptual tasks. Moreover, Herzog and Fahle (1997) found that performance between individuals were highly varied in the absence of feedback; some improved, some were irregular with no overall learning, and some deteriorated in performance. Therefore, future studies could employ block or trial-by-trial feedback to explain individual variations in learning and help identify changes in information detection over time. For example, block feedback whereby only the proportion of correct response is provided after a complete block may aid in reducing response biases and performance variance to strengthen perceptual learning processes (Liu, Dosher, & Lu, 2014).
Weber, Appel, and Kronberger (2015) advocates research with seeks further knowledge and acceptance of cultural distinctiveness of cognition and behaviours to encourage equal educational success for a diverse student body within learning environments. Research which addresses the learning barriers to academic achievement contributes to a positive reformation of the education system to accommodate the diverse learning needs within multicultural classrooms (Schmader & Hall, 2014). Therefore, the present study is important as it add to our knowledge of cultural diversity in the community (Santamaria, 2009). Besides, further research in this domain is essential to reveal the nature of perceptual learning and brain plasticity. These findings can subsequently contribute to the development of training paradigms to induce learning transfer. For example, the uncovered concepts and theories can be applied to training programmes that aims to improve vision in individuals whose daily activities necessitates significant visual demands such as pilots or firefighters (Deveau, Ozer, & Seitz, 2014). In addition, understanding the neural basis of perceptual learning incites new innovations and interventions in training visual acuity which could possibly improve a range of visual disabilities such as amblyopia, cortical blindness, or vision declines especially in the elderly (Bower, Watanabe & Andersen, 2013; DeLoss, Pierce, & Andersen, 2013).
Conclusion
The Glass (1969) pattern experimental paradigm of the present study is important as it is a representation of reality whereby the human visual system is regularly exposed to an abundance of information. Under conditions of overwhelming visual inputs, the perceptual system is typically more inclined to process global rather than local information (Mills & Dodds, 2014). However, speed and accuracy of information processing can vary significantly between groups due to cultural mediation (Davidoff et al., 2008). As reflected in the present study, collectivistic groups of international students had greater improvements in response accuracy compared to individualistic groups of European students in the Glass pattern discrimination task due to their tendency to attend to the global information. However, the nonsignificant difference in behavioural performance in each individual run between the individualistic and collectivistic group reflects a need for further research. Future studies should employ priming procedures, advanced neural measures, and external feedback paradigms to obtain a clearer indication of cultural difference in perceptual learning. Nevertheless, the present study may add to a range of literature which emphasizes a commonality between distinct cultures, bringing to attention the elements that connect people rather than those that set them apart. Besides that, the findings of this study provide an insight into the perceptual learning differences between cultures which could help reform education systems to accommodate diverse learning needs (Schmader & Hall, 2014).
References
Ahissar, M., & Hochstein, S. (2004). The reverse hierarchy theory of visual perceptual learning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(10), 457-464. doi:
10.1016/j.tics.2004.08.011
Alea, N., & Wang, Q. (2015). Going global: The functions of autobiographical memory in cultural context. Memory, 23(1), 1-10. doi: 10.1080/09658211.2014.972416
Bang, M. (2015). Culture, learning, and development and the natural world: The influences of situative perspectives. Educational Psychologist, 50(3), 220-233. doi:
10.1080/00461520.2015.1075402
Boduroglu, A., Shah, P., & Nisbett, R. E. (2009). Cultural differences in allocation of attention in visual information processing. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 40(3), 349-360. doi: 10.1177/0022022108331005
Bower, J., Watanabe, T., & Andersen, G. J. (2013). Perceptual learning and aging: improved performance for low-contrast motion discrimination. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 66. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00066
Boyd, R., & Richerson, P. J. (2009). Culture and the evolution of human cooperation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1533), 3281-3288. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2009.0134
Boyd, R., & Richerson, P. J. (2010). Transmission coupling mechanisms: cultural group selection. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 365(1559), 3787-3795. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2010.0046
Boyke, J., Driemeyer, J., Gaser, C., Bchel, C., & May, A. (2008). Training-induced brain structure changes in the elderly. Journal of Neuroscience, 28(28), 7031-7035. doi:
10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0742-08.2008
Brewer, M. B., & Gardner, W. (1996). Who is this" We"? Levels of collective identity and self-representations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(1), 83-93. doi:
10.1037/0022-3514.71.1.83
Cai, J. (2005). U.S. and Chinese teachers constructing, knowing, and evaluating representations to teach mathematics. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 7, 135
169. doi: 10.1207/s15327833mtl0702_3
Champion, R. (2002). Sampling Can Produce Solid Findings: Increase Your Effectiveness and Manage Volumes of Data. Journal of Staff Development, 23(1), 62-63.
Chang, L., Mak, M. C., Li, T., Wu, B. P., Chen, B. B., & Lu, H. J. (2011). Cultural adaptations to environmental variability: An evolutionary account of EastWest differences. Educational Psychology Review, 23(1), 99-129. doi: 10.1007/s10648010-9149-0
Cheek, N. N., & Norem, J. K. (2016). Holistic thinkers anchor less: Exploring the roles of self-construal and thinking styles in anchoring susceptibility. Personality and Individual Differences. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2016.01.034
Chiao, J. Y., Cheon, B. K., Pornpattananangkul, N., Mrazek, A. J., & Blizinsky, K. D. (2013).
Cultural neuroscience: Progress and promise. Psychological Inquiry, 24(1), 1-19. doi:
10.1080/1047840X.2013.752715
Chua, H. F., Boland, J. E., & Nisbett, R. E. (2005). Cultural variation in eye movements during scene perception. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(35), 12629-12633. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0506162102
Costa, A., & Sebastin-Galls, N. (2014). How does the bilingual experience sculpt the brain? Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 15(5), 336-345. doi: 10.1038/nrn3709
Cutting, J. E. (1991). Four ways to reject directed perception. Ecological Psychology, 3(1),
25-34. doi: 10.1207/s15326969eco0301_2
Dahlin, B., & Watkins, D. (2000). The role of repetition in the processes of memorising and understanding: A comparison of the views of German and Chinese secondary school students in Hong Kong. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70(1), 65-84. doi:
10.1348/000709900157976
Dakin, S. C. (1997). The detection of structure in glass patterns: Psychophysics and computational models. Vision Research, 37(16), 2227-2246. doi: 10.1016/S00426989(97)00038-2
Danks, D., & Rose, D. (2010). Diversity in representations; uniformity in learning. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33(2-3), 90-91. doi:
10.1017/S0140525X10000075
Das, A., Tadin, D., & Huxlin, K. R. (2014). Beyond blindsight: properties of visual relearning in cortically blind fields. Journal of Neuroscience, 34(35), 11652-11664. doi:
10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1076-14.2014
Davidoff, J., Fonteneau, E., & Fagot, J. (2008). Local and global processing: Observations from a remote culture. Cognition, 108(3), 702-709. doi:
10.1016/j.cognition.2008.06.004
DeLoss, D. J., Pierce, R. S., & Andersen, G. J. (2013). Multisensory integration, aging, and the sound-induced flash illusion. Psychology and Aging, 28(3), 802-812. doi:
10.1037/a0033289
DeLoss, D. J., Watanabe, T., & Andersen, G. J. (2015). Improving vision among older adults:
behavioral training to improve sight. Psychological Science, 26(4), 456-466. doi:
10.1177/0956797614567510
Deveau, J., Ozer, D. J., & Seitz, A. R. (2014). Improved vision and on-field performance in baseball through perceptual learning. Current Biology, 24(4), R146-R147. doi:
10.1016/j.cub.2014.01.004
DiMaggio, P. (1997). Culture and cognition. Annual Review of Sociology, 23(1), 263-287. doi: 10.1146/annurev.soc.23.1.263
Doherty, M. J., Tsuji, H., & Phillips, W. A. (2008). The context sensitivity of visual size perception varies across cultures. Perception, 37(9), 1426-1433. doi: 10.1068/p5946
Dosher, B. A., & Lu, Z. L. (1998). Perceptual learning reflects external noise filtering and internal noise reduction through channel reweighting. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 95(23), 13988-13993. doi: 10.1073/pnas.95.23.13988
Dowd, S. M., & Artistico, D. (2016). Type and strength of self-construal interact with the influence of anchoring heuristics in appraisals of self-efficacy. Learning and Individual Differences, 49, 400-405. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2016.05.018
Draganski, B., Gaser, C., Busch, V., Schuierer, G., Bogdahn, U., & May, A. (2004).
Neuroplasticity: changes in grey matter induced by training. Nature, 427(6972), 311312. doi: 10.1038/427311a
Drewes, J., Goren, G., Zhu, W., & Elder, J. H. (2016). Recurrent Processing in the Formation of Shape Percepts. Journal of Neuroscience, 36(1), 185-192. doi:
10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2347-15.2016
Ennen, N. L., Stark, E., & Lassiter, A. (2015). The importance of trust for satisfaction, motivation, and academic performance in student learning groups. Social Psychology of Education, 18(3), 615-633. doi: 10.1007/s11218-015-9306-x
Fahle, M., & Edelman, S. (1993). Long-term learning in vernier acuity: Effects of stimulus orientation, range and of feedback. Vision Research, 33(3), 397-412. doi:
10.1016/0042-6989(93)90094-D
Fahle, M., Edelman, S., & Poggio, T. (1995). Fast perceptual learning in hyperacuity. Vision
Research, 35(21), 3003-3013. doi: 10.1016/0042-6989(95)00044-Z
Galvn, A. (2010). Neural plasticity of development and learning. Human brain
Mapping, 31(6), 879-890. doi: 10.1002/hbm.21029
Garcia, A., Kuai, S. G., & Kourtzi, Z. (2013). Differences in the time course of learning for hard compared to easy training. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 110. doi:
10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00110
Gibson, E. J. (1963). Perceptual learning. Annual Review of Psychology, 14(1), 29-56. doi:
10.1146/annurev.ps.14.020163.000333
Gibson, J. J. (1966). The senses considered as perceptual systems. Oxford, England:
Houghton Mifflin.
Gibson, J. J., & Gibson, E. J. (1955). Perceptual learning: differentiation or enrichment? Psychological Review, 62(1), 32-41. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14357525
Gilbert, C. D., & Li, W. (2012). Adult visual cortical plasticity. Neuron, 75(2), 250-264. doi:
10.1016/j.neuron.2012.06.030
Gilbert, C. D., & Li, W. (2013). Top-down influences on visual processing. Nature Reviews
Neuroscience, 14(5), 350-363. doi: 10.1038/nrn3476
Glass, L. (1969). Moire effect from random dots. Nature, 223(5206), 578-580. doi:
10.1038/223578a0
Glass, L. (1969). Moire effect from random dots. Nature, 223(5206), 578-580. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/5799528
Gogtay, N., Giedd, J. N., Lusk, L., Hayashi, K. M., Greenstein, D., Vaituzis, A. C., Nugent,
T. F., Herman, D. H., Clasen, L.S., Toga, A. W., Rapoport, J. L., & Thompson, P. M.
(2004). Dynamic mapping of human cortical development during childhood through early adulthood. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 101(21), 8174-8179. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0402680101
Goh, J. O., Chee, M. W., Tan, J. C., Venkatraman, V., Hebrank, A., Leshikar, E. D., ... & Park, D. C. (2007). Age and culture modulate object processing and objectscene binding in the ventral visual area. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 7(1), 44-52. doi: 10.3758/CABN.7.1.44
Gregory, R. (1970). The Intelligent Eye. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.
Grossmann, I., Ellsworth, P. C., & Hong, Y. Y. (2012). Culture, attention, and emotion. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141(1), 31-36. doi:
10.1037/a0023817
Gudykunst, W. B., & Lee, C. M. (2003). Assessing the validity of self-construal scales. Human Communication Research, 29(2), 253-274. doi: 10.1111/j.14682958.2003.tb00838.x
Gudykunst, W. B., Matsumoto, Y., TingToomey, S., Nishida, T., Kim, K., & Heyman, S. (1996). The influence of cultural individualismcollectivism, self construals, and individual values on communication styles across cultures. Human Communication Research, 22(4), 510-543. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2958.1996.tb00377.x
Gutirrez, K. D., & Rogoff, B. (2003). Cultural ways of learning: Individual traits or repertoires of practice. Educational Researcher, 32(5), 19-25. doi:
10.3102/0013189X032005019
Han, S., & Humphreys, G. (2016). Self-construal: A cultural framework for brain function. Current Opinion in Psychology, 8, 10-14. doi: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.09.013
Han, S., & Ma, Y. (2014). Cultural differences in human brain activity: A quantitative metaanalysis. NeuroImage, 99, 293-300. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.05.062
Han, S., & Northoff, G. (2009). Understanding the self: A cultural neuroscience approach. Progress in Brain Research, 178, 203-212. doi: 10.1016/S00796123(09)17814-7
Han, S., Northoff, G., Vogeley, K., Wexler, B. E., Kitayama, S., & Varnum, M. E. (2013). A cultural neuroscience approach to the biosocial nature of the human brain. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 335-359. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-071112-054629
Hansen, K. A., Hillenbrand, S. F., & Ungerleider, L. G. (2012). Effects of prior knowledge on decisions made under perceptual vs. categorical uncertainty. Decision Making under Uncertainty, 6(163), 1-10. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2012.00163
Hedden, T., Ketay, S., Aron, A., Markus, H. R., & Gabrieli, J. D. (2008). Cultural influences on neural substrates of attentional control. Psychological Science, 19(1), 12-17. doi:
10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02038.x
Herzog, M. H., & Fahle, M. (1997). The role of feedback in learning a vernier discrimination task. Vision Research, 37(15), 2133-2141. doi: 10.1016/S0042-6989(97)00043-6
Hochstein, S., & Ahissar, M. (2002). View from the top: Hierarchies and reverse hierarchies in the visual system. Neuron, 36(5), 791-804. doi: 10.1016/S0896-6273(02)01091-7
Hong, Y. Y., Morris, M. W., Chiu, C. Y., & Benet-Martinez, V. (2000). Multicultural minds:
A dynamic constructivist approach to culture and cognition. American Psychologist, 55(7), 709-720. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.55.7.709
Hong, Y. Y., Morris, M. W., Chiu, C. Y., & Benet-Martinez, V. (2000). Multicultural minds:
A dynamic constructivist approach to culture and cognition. American Psychologist, 55(7), 709-720. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.55.7.709
Jacobs, D. M., & Michaels, C. F. (2007). Direct learning. Ecological Psychology, 19(4), 321349. doi: 10.1080/10407410701432337
Jacobs, D. M., Runeson, S., & Michaels, C. F. (2001). Learning to visually perceive the relative mass of colliding balls in globally and locally constrained task ecologies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27(5), 1019-1038. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.27.5.1019
Jenkins, L. J., Yang, Y. J., Goh, J., Hong, Y. Y., & Park, D. C. (2010). Cultural differences in the lateral occipital complex while viewing incongruent scenes. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 5(2-3), 236-241. doi: 10.1093/scan/nsp056
Judd, C. H. (1902). Practice and its effects on the perception of illusion. Psychological
Review, 9, 2739. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0073071
Kastanakis, M. N., & Voyer, B. G. (2014). The effect of culture on perception and cognition:
A conceptual framework. Journal of Business Research, 67(4), 425-433. doi:
10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.03.028
Kim, D., Seitz, A. R., & Watanabe, T. (2015). Visual perceptual learning by operant conditioning training follows rules of contingency. Visual Cognition, 23(1-2), 147-
160. doi: 10.1080/13506285.2015.1015663
Kim, H. S., & Sasaki, J. Y. (2014). Cultural neuroscience: Biology of the mind in cultural contexts. Annual Review of Psychology, 65, 487-514. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych010213-115040
Kitayama, S. (2002). Culture and basic psychological processes--toward a system view of culture: comment on Oyserman et al.(2002). Psychological Bulletin, 128(1), 89-96. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.128.1.89
Kitayama, S., Duffy, S., Kawamura, T., & Larsen, J. T. (2003). Perceiving an object and its context in different cultures: A cultural look at new look. Psychological Science, 14(3), 201-206. doi: 10.1111/1467-9280.02432
Kitayama, S., Markus, H. R., Matsumoto, H., & Norasakkunkit, V. (1997). Individual and collective processes in the construction of the self: Self-enhancement in the United
States and self-criticism in Japan. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(6), 1245-1267. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.72.6.1245
Kuwabara, M., & Smith, L. B. (2012). Cross-cultural differences in cognitive development:
Attention to relations and objects. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 113(1), 20-35. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2012.04.009
Lee, J. (2009). Universals and specifics of math self-concept, math selfefficacy, and math anxiety across 41 PISA 2003 participating countries. Learning and Individual Differences, 19, 355365. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif .2008.10.009
Lehmann, L., & Feldman, M. W. (2008). The co-evolution of culturally inherited altruistic helping and cultural transmission under random group formation. Theoretical Population Biology, 73(4), 506-516. doi: 10.1016/j.tpb.2008.02.004
Leung, T., & Kim, M. S. (1997). A revised self-construal scale. Honolulu: University of Hawaii at Manoa.
Levine, T. R., Bresnahan, M. J., Park, H. S., Lapinski, M. K., Wittenbaum, G. M., Shearman, S. M., ... & Ohashi, R. (2003). Selfconstrual scales lack validity. Human
Communication Research, 29(2), 210-252. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2958.2003.tb00837.x
Li, P., Legault, J., & Litcofsky, K. A. (2014). Neuroplasticity as a function of second language learning: anatomical changes in the human brain. Cortex, 58, 301-324. doi:
10.1016/j.cortex.2014.05.001
Lin, Z., Lin, Y., & Han, S. (2008). Self-construal priming modulates visual activity underlying global/local perception. Biological Psychology, 77(1), 93-97. doi:
10.1016/j.biopsycho.2007.08.002
Liu, J., Dosher, B., & Lu, Z. L. (2014). Modeling trial by trial and block feedback in perceptual learning. Vision Research, 99, 46-56. doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2014.01.001
Lotz, N., & Sharp, H. (2017). The influence of cognitive style, design setting and cultural background on sketch-based ideation by novice interaction designers. The Design Journal, 20(3), 333-356. doi: 10.1080/14606925.2017.1301039
Ma, Y., Bang, D., Wang, C., Allen, M., Frith, C., Roepstorff, A., & Han, S. (2014).
Sociocultural patterning of neural activity during self-reflection. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 9(1), 73-80. doi: 10.1093/scan/nss103
Maloney, R. K., Mitchison, G. J., & Barlow, H. B. (1987). Limit to the detection of Glass patterns in the presence of noise. Journal of the Optical Society of America A, 4(12),
2336-2341. doi: 10.1364/JOSAA.4.002336
Mancini, F., Dolgevica, K., Steckelmacher, J., Haggard, P., Friston, K., & Iannetti, G. D. (2016). Perceptual learning to discriminate the intensity and spatial location of nociceptive stimuli. Scientific Reports, 6, 39104. doi: 10.1038/srep39104
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98(2), 224. doi: 10.1037/0033295X.98.2.224
Masuda, T., & Nisbett, R. E. (2001). Attending holistically versus analytically: Comparing the context sensitivity of Japanese and Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(5), 922-934. doi: 10.1037//0022-35I4.81.5.922
Matsumoto, D., Grissom, R. J., & Dinnel, D. L. (2001). Do between-culture differences really mean that people are different? A look at some measures of cultural effect size. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32(4), 478-490. doi:
10.1177/0022022101032004007
Mayhew, S. D., Li, S., & Kourtzi, Z. (2012). Learning acts on distinct processes for visual form perception in the human brain. Journal of Neuroscience, 32(3), 775-786. doi:
10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2033-11.2012
McKone, E., Davies, A. A., Fernando, D., Aalders, R., Leung, H., Wickramariyaratne, T., &
Platow, M. J. (2010). Asia has the global advantage: Race and visual attention. Vision Research, 50(16), 1540-1549. doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2010.05.010
Meuwese, J. D., Post, R. A., Scholte, H. S., & Lamme, V. A. (2013). Does perceptual learning require consciousness or attention? Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 25(10), 1579-1596. doi: 10.1162/jocn_a_00424
Michaels, C. F., Arzamarski, R., Isenhower, R. W., & Jacobs, D. M. (2008). Direct learning in dynamic touch. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34(4), 944-957. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.34.4.944
Mills, M., & Dodd, M. D. (2014). Which way is which? Examining global/local processing with symbolic cues. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143(4), 1429. doi:
10.1037/a0036454
Miyamoto, Y. (2013). Culture and analytic versus holistic cognition: Toward multilevel analyses of cultural influences. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 131-
188. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-407236-7.00003-6
Mok, A., & Morris, M. W. (2012). Managing two cultural identities the malleability of bicultural identity integration as a function of induced global or local processing. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38(2), 233-246. doi:
10.1177/0146167211426438
Morishita, H., & Hensch, T. K. (2008). Critical period revisited: impact on vision. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 18(1), 101-107. doi: 10.1016/j.conb.2008.05.009
Navon, D. (1977). Forest before trees: The precedence of global features in visual perception. Cognitive Psychology, 9(3), 353-383. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(77)90012-3
Navon, D. (2003). What does a compound letter tell the psychologists mind? Acta
Psychologica, 114, 273309. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2003.06 .002
Neisser, U. (1967). Cognitive psychology. New York, NY: AppletonCentury-Crofts.
Nisbett, R. E., & Miyamoto, Y. (2005). The influence of culture: holistic versus analytic perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(10), 467-473. doi:
10.1016/j.tics.2005.08.004
Nisbett, R. E., Peng, K., Choi, I., & Norenzayan, A. (2001). Culture and systems of thought:
holistic versus analytic cognition. Psychological Review, 108(2), 291-310. doi:
10.1037/0033-295X.108.2.291
O'Reilly, R. C. (2001). Generalization in interactive networks: The benefits of inhibitory competition and Hebbian learning. Neural Computation, 13(6), 1199-1241. doi:
10.1162/08997660152002834
O'Reilly, R. C., Wyatte, D., Herd, S., Mingus, B., & Jilk, D. J. (2013). Recurrent processing during object recognition. Frontiers in Psychology, 4(124), 1-14. doi:
10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00124
Oyserman, D., Coon, H. M., & Kemmelmeier, M. (2002). Rethinking individualism and collectivism: evaluation of theoretical assumptions and meta-analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 128(1), 3-72. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.128.1.3
Park, D. C., & Huang, C. M. (2010). Culture wires the brain: A cognitive neuroscience perspective. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5(4), 391-400. doi:
10.1177/1745691610374591
Park, D. C., Nisbett, R., & Hedden, T. (1999). Aging, culture, and cognition. The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 54(2), P75-P84. doi: 10.1093/geronb/54B.2.P75
Petrov, A. A., Dosher, B. A., & Lu, Z. L. (2005). The dynamics of perceptual learning: an incremental reweighting model. Psychological Review, 112(4), 715. doi:
10.1037/0033-295X.112.4.715
Petrov, A. A., Dosher, B. A., & Lu, Z. L. (2006). Perceptual learning without feedback in non-stationary contexts: Data and model. Vision Research, 46(19), 3177-3197. doi:
10.1016/j.visres.2006.03.022
Porporino, M., Iarocci, G., Shore, D. I., & Burack, J. A. (2004). A developmental change in selective attention and global form perception. International Journal of Behavioral
Development, 28(4), 358-364. doi: 10.1080/01650250444000063
Pylyshyn, Z. (1999). Is vision continuous with cognition? The case for cognitive impenetrability of visual perception. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22(3), 341-365. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11301517
Rayner, K., Castelhano, M. S., & Yang, J. (2009). Eye movements when looking at unusual/weird scenes: Are there cultural differences? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35(1), 254-259. doi:
10.1037/a0013508
Rensink, R. A., O'Regan, J. K., & Clark, J. J. (1997). To see or not to see: The need for attention to perceive changes in scenes. Psychological Science, 8(5), 368-373. doi:
10.1111/j.1467-9280.1997.tb00427.x
Richerson, P. J., Boyd, R., & Henrich, J. (2010). Gene-culture coevolution in the age of genomics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(Supplement 2),
8985-8992. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0914631107
Rivers, W. H. R. (1905). Observations on the senses of the Todas. British Journal of Psychology, 1(4), 321-396.
Rop, G., & Withagen, R. (2014). Perceivers vary in their capacity to benefit from feedback in learning to perceive length by dynamic touch. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 76(3), 864-876.
Sagi, D. (2011). Perceptual learning in vision research. Vision Research, 51(13), 1552-1566. doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2010.10.019
Santamaria, L. J. (2009). Culturally responsive differentiated instruction: Narrowing gaps between best pedagogical practices benefiting all learners. Teachers College Record, 111(1), 214-247.
Savani, K., & Markus, H. R. (2012). A processing advantage associated with analytic perceptual tendencies: European Americans outperform Asians on multiple object tracking. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(3), 766-769. doi:
10.1016/j.jesp.2012.01.005
Saxe, R., & Kanwisher, N. (2003). People thinking about thinking people: the role of the temporo-parietal junction in theory of mind. Neuroimage, 19(4), 1835-1842. doi:
10.1016/S1053-8119(03)00230-1
Schmader, T., & Hall, W. M. (2014). Stereotype threat in school and at work putting science into practice. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1(1), 30-37. doi: 10.1177/2372732214548861
Schommer-Aikins, M., & Easter, M. (2008). Epistemological beliefs' contributions to study strategies of Asian Americans and European Americans. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(4), 920-929. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.100.4.920
Schwartz, S. H. (1990). Individualismcollectivism: Critique and proposed refinements.
Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 21(2), 139157. doi
:10.1177/0022022190212001
Segedy, J. R., Kinnebrew, J. S., & Biswas, G. (2013). The effect of contextualized conversational feedback in a complex open-ended learning environment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 61(1), 71-89. doi: 10.1007/s11423-012-9275
Seitz, A. R., Nanez, J. E., Holloway, S., Tsushima, Y., & Watanabe, T. (2006). Two cases requiring external reinforcement in perceptual learning. Journal of Vision, 6(9), 966 973. doi: 10.1167/6.9.9
Seitz, A., & Watanabe, T. (2005). A unified model for perceptual learning. Trends in
Cognitive Sciences, 9(7), 329-334. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2005.05.010
Singelis, T. M. (1994). The measurement of independent and interdependent self- construals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20(5), 580-591. doi:
10.1177/0146167294205014
Sui, J., & Han, S. (2007). Self-construal priming modulates neural substrates of selfawareness. Psychological Science, 18(10), 861-866. doi: 10.1111/j.14679280.2007.01992.x
Syed, M., & Azmitia, M. (2010). Narrative and ethnic identity exploration: A longitudinal account of emerging adults ethnicity-related experiences. Developmental Psychology, 46(1), 208-219. doi: 10.1037/a0017825
Vallabha, G. K., & McClelland, J. L. (2007). Success and failure of new speech category learning in adulthood: Consequences of learned Hebbian attractors in topographic maps. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 7(1), 53-73. doi:
10.3758/CABN.7.1.53
van der Kamp, J., Withagen, R., & de Wit, M. M. (2013). Cultural and learning differences in the Judd illusion. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 75(5), 1027-1038. doi:
10.3758/s13414-013-0458-5 van Doorn, H., van der Kamp, J., de Wit, M., & Savelsbergh, G. J. (2009). Another look at the Mller-Lyer illusion: Different gaze patterns in vision for action and perception. Neuropsychologia, 47(3), 804-812. doi:
10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2008.12.003 van Gog, T., & Scheiter, K. (2010). Eye tracking as a tool to study and enhance multimedia learning. Learning and Instruction, 20(2), 95-99. doi:
10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.02.009
Wan, M., Yang, Y., Liu, Y., & Li, J. (2016). Do multicultural experiences facilitate global processing style? Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 19(3), 209-214. doi:
10.1111/ajsp.12144
Wang, C., Oyserman, D., Liu, Q., Li, H., & Han, S. (2013). Accessible cultural mind-set modulates default mode activity: Evidence for the culturally situated brain. Social Neuroscience, 8(3), 203-216. doi: 10.1080/17470919.2013.775966
Wang, Q. (2008). Being American, being Asian: The bicultural self and autobiographical memory in Asian Americans. Cognition, 107(2), 743-751. doi:
10.1016/j.cognition.2007.08.005
Wang, Q. (2016). Why should we all be cultural psychologists? Lessons from the study of social cognition. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11(5), 583-596. doi:
10.1177/1745691616645552
Wang, Q., & Fivush, R. (2005). Motherchild conversations of emotionally salient events:
exploring the functions of emotional reminiscing in EuropeanAmerican and Chinese families. Social Development, 14(3), 473-495. doi: 10.1111/j.14679507.2005.00312.x
Wang, Y., Ma, S. S., & Li, D. (2015). Customer participation in virtual brand communities:
The self-construal perspective. Information & Management, 52(5), 577-587. doi:
10.1016/j.im.2015.04.003
Watanabe, T., & Sasaki, Y. (2015). Perceptual learning: toward a comprehensive theory. Annual Review of Psychology, 66, 197-221. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych010814-015214
Weber, S., Appel, M., & Kronberger, N. (2015). Stereotype threat and the cognitive performance of adolescent immigrants: The role of cultural identity strength. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 42, 71-81. doi:
10.1016/j.cedpsych.2015.05.001
Wilson, H. R., & Wilkinson, F. (1998). Detection of global structure in Glass patterns:
implications for form vision. Vision Research, 38(19), 2933-2947. doi:
10.1016/S0042-6989(98)00109-6
Withagen, R. (2004). The pickup of nonspecifying variables does not entail indirect perception. Ecological Psychology, 16(3), 237-253. doi:
10.1207/s15326969eco1603_4
Withagen, R., & Van Wermeskerken, M. (2009). Individual differences in learning to perceive length by dynamic touch: Evidence for variation in perceptual learning capacities. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 71(1), 64-75. doi:
10.3758/APP.71.1.64
Witkin, H. A., & Berry, J. W. (1975). Psychological differentiation in cross-cultural perspective. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 6(1), 4-87. doi:
10.1177/002202217500600102
Yan, Z., Hu, L., Chen, H., & Lu, F. (2008). Computer Vision Syndrome: A widely spreading but largely unknown epidemic among computer users. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(5), 2026-2042. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2007.09.004
Zhang, B., & Seo, H. S. (2015). Visual attention toward food-item images can vary as a function of background saliency and culture: An eye-tracking study. Food Quality and Preference, 41, 172-179. doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2014.12.004
Zhang, J. Y., Cong, L. J., Klein, S. A., Levi, D. M., & Yu, C. (2014). Perceptual Learning
Improves Adult Amblyopic Vision Through Rule-Based Cognitive
Compensation. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, 55(4), 2020-2030. doi: 10.1167/iovs.13-13739
right000
BLSS - Psychology Research Ethics Application Form
Project Title Examining The Impact of Instagram on the Body Image Perceptions and Self-Acceptance of Adolescent MalesProposed Start Date
10/01/2024
Proposed End Date
24/05/2024
-1270372110Section A: Researcher(s) Details
00Section A: Researcher(s) Details
Please provide details of the Principal Investigator (Student) and Co-Investigator (Supervisor) if necessary.
A1: Principal Investigator (Student details)
Full Name: Muhammad Osama Khan Email: Muhammad.khan34@mail.bcu.ac.ukCollege: PsychologyPosition:BSc Student (Psychology)A2: Co-investigators (Supervisor details)
Full Name: Helen Egan Email: Helen.Egan@bcu.ac.ukCollege: PsychologyPosition: ProfessorFull Name: Click here to enter text. Email: Click here to enter text.College: Click here to enter text.Position: Choose an item.
left0Section B: Nature of Project
00Section B: Nature of Project
This section focuses on gaining an overall understanding of what is being examined within the research project. There should be sufficient detail so that a layperson can understand what is being assessed and how.
AUTOTEXTLIST t "This answer should refer to relevant literature underpinning the project, but be accessible. It should provide justification for the research idea (in terms of either public/societal impact or its novel contribution to knowledge in the field.)" * MERGEFORMAT B1 - Please provide a brief background and rationale to the research:
(This should be no more than 300 words, written for non-subject experts and must include rationale and references)
Social media is an ever-present part of young peoples lives and presents challenges and pressures for young people in comparison to previous generations (Keyte et al 2020). Previous research highlights that prolonged social media use is associated with several negative psychological consequences. An important area of worry as young males negotiate the challenges of adolescence is how Instagram affects their opinions of their bodies and self-worth.
Body image and self-esteem are greatly moulded throughout adolescence, a crucial developmental time. Instagram is full ofvisual material on looks, body standards, and fitness since it is a visual platform. However, there is still a shortage of knowledge on the effects of this exposure on male teenage depression (Ahadzadeh, Sharif and Ong, 2017). The impacts of media, especially social media, on body image and eating behaviours have been the subject of several studies; however, more research is needed to fully understand the subtleties of Instagram's effecton male adolescents. Psychological wellbeing may be impacted by idealised photos and carefully chosen material on Instagram, which may lead to skewed judgements and irrational expectations (Yurdagl et al., 2021).
There is little evidence around protective factors that might help users in promoting well-being. Mindfulness incorporates elements of self-compassion and self-kindness and self-acceptance rather than self-criticism and promotes learning to accept that having imperfections is part of human nature. Research suggests that individuals who are high in mindfulness report greater emotional well-being which may protect against social stressors (Bluth et al 2016).
The study hopes to investigate frequency of Instagram usage and its psychological implications on body acceptance and eating behaviours. The study is important since it looks at how Instagram could affect adolescent males' well-being in terms of body acceptance and eating behaviours. Through illuminating these relationships, the research hopes to educate parents, educators, and social media companies about the challenges presented by Instagram and provide evidence-based suggestions for reducing those disadvantages. The present study is consistent with the wider discussion around the relationship between social media and the mental health of adolescents. It highlights the need forspecific interventions in the digital realm to promote good body image beliefs and wellbeing among male adolescents.
AUTOTEXTLIST t "This answer should define what exactly the research seeks to examine or explore. This can refer to more quantitative outcomes (e.g. differences between groups) or gaining a meaningful and detailed (qualitative) understanding of a phenomenon." * MERGEFORMAT B2 - Please concisely state the research aim(s) and objective(s):
(This should be no more than 150 words and written for non-subject experts)
Aim: The research aims to progress previous research by investigating the impact Instagram use has upon body image and acceptance, as well as to explore the relationship between mindfulness and Instagram use.Objective:
To investigate Instagram usage, using the The Multidimensional Instagram Intensity Scale (MFIS) Mantzios & Keyte (2018). The scale consists of four categories including persistence, boredom, overuse and self-expression.
To investigate body image using the Body Image Acceptance and Action Questionnaire-5 (BI-AAQ-5;Basarkod, Sahdra & Ciarrochi, 2018)
To investigate mindfulness, and how this impacts on body image acceptance and its role in Instagram use and eating behaviors using the FFMQ-15: 15-item Five-Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire
To highlight the need for intervention and types of intervention to overall improve young males mental health whilst using social media.
AUTOTEXTLIST t "This answer should specify the research methods and what they are being used to examine (as opposed to just listing what could potentially be implemented). It should describe each in turn (e.g. what each questionnaire is measuring). " * MERGEFORMAT B3a - Please provide a succinct overview of the methodological approach and materials used in this project:
(This should be no more than 500 words and written for non-subject experts)
Design
This quantitative investigation will use a cross-sectional research design to examine how young males' opinions of their bodies and eating behaviours are affected by Instagram. Data will be collected online through surveys. The independent variables are Instagram usage, and the dependent variables are body acceptance and mindfulness. The study uses statistical techniques to gather and examine quantitative data in order to provide aquantitative understanding of the relationships between adolescent males' psychological health, the material they are exposed to, and their use of Instagram. This method makes it possible to thoroughly examine the complex interactions between these factors, which advancesknowledge of how Instagram affects adolescent males' perceptions of their bodies and self-worth.
Measures/Materials
The Multidimensional Instagram Intensity Scale (MFIS) Mantzios & Keyte (2018). The scale consists of four categories including persistence, boredom, overuse and self-expression. Samples include: I feel bad if I dont check my Instagram daily, I spend more time on Instagram than I would like to.
The FFMQ-15: 15-item Five-Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire Baer et al. (2012). It consists of the following sections; Observing, Describing, Acting with Awareness, Non-Judging of inner experience, and Non-Reactivity to inner experience.
TheBody Image Acceptance and Action Questionnaire-5 (BI-AAQ-5;Basarkod, Sahdra & Ciarrochi, 2018) (a=.92) is a short form of theBody image Acceptance and Action Questionnaire(BI-AAQ) which aims to assess body image acceptance. The BI-AAQ-5 is a 5-item scale where responses are recorded using a 7-point Likert scale (1 = Always true and 7 = Never true). Sample items include:Worrying about my weight makes it difficult for me to live a life that I value, I shut down when I feel bad about my body shape or weight. Cronbachs alpha for theBI-AAQ-5in the present research was .92.
Participants
Adolescent malesbetween the ages of 18-24 are the targeted population.. The intended sample size is 80-100 participants to allow enough data to be generated for sufficient analysis. They will be recruited through social media and the Research Participation Scheme (RPS). To guarantee participation from a range of demographic groups, participants will be voluntarily recruited. The inclusion criteria concentrate on frequent Instagram users toprovide a more nuanced picture of the influence of the site on young body image and self-esteem. Those who find the topics of body image and self-acceptance distressing will be encouraged not to take part.
Procedures
All data will be collected using QuestionPro. Participants will be asked to read through the participant information sheet before deciding whether they will proceed with the study. Participants will be asked to sign the consent form prior to completing the study. They will then be asked to complete the above-mentioned scales and will then be given the debrief form for further information.
AUTOTEXTLIST t "This answer should specify the research methods and what they are being used to examine (as opposed to just listing what could potentially be implemented). It should describe each in turn (e.g. what each questionnaire is measuring). " * MERGEFORMAT B3b- Please outline how you will analyse your data.
Using a variety of statistical tests, SPSS will be used to analyse the data and answer the study objectives. Mindfulness, Instagram use, and participant attributes will all be summed together using descriptive statistics. Correlation analysis will look at how variables are related to one another and regression analysis to evaluate how Instagram content affects body image acceptance. This thorough statistical method will provide a reliable examination of how Instagram affects adolescent males' opinions of their bodies and self-worth.
AUTOTEXTLIST t "Please append photocopies of any of these that have been already attained. " * MERGEFORMAT B4a - Does this research require external ethical clearance (i.e. NOMS, HMPPS, NHS) or DBS check? If so, please indicate if this has been attained or when this will be attained.
This does not apply to this study.
AUTOTEXTLIST t "Please append photocopies of any of these that have been already attained. " * MERGEFORMAT B4b Is there any potential conflict of interest? (E.g. are you collecting data from your workplace, or from people you know personally? This needs to be declared here, even if youre advertising on your own social media platforms and likely to recruit friends or family. If the answer is yes, please clearly explain how you will mitigate power dynamics and coercion).
No, there is not a possible conflict of interest. Information from my place of employment or people I personally know is not collected during the data-gatheringprocedure. To preserve impartiality, the recruitment of volunteers will occur using a variety of methods, preventing any power relationships or coercion. To guarantee the validity and objectivity of the study, strict adherence to ethical standards shall be maintained at all times.
B5 Is your research particularly likely to involve any of the following? If so, specific considerations for these need to be addressed in sections C & D:
Participation of those under 18 years of age
Participation of those with a learning disability which might impact their capacity to give consent
Participation of those with a mental health condition (i.e. only collecting data from participants with a diagnosis)
Participation of those with physical or sensory impairments
Participation of those with sensitive/significant life experiences
(e.g. victims of abuse / ex-offenders)
Data collection surrounding highly sensitive topics
(e.g. abuse, terrorism, religion, interpersonal violence, terminal illness)
Data collection from those in prison
Constraint of participant rights
(e.g. informed consent via deception, or perceptions of the right to withdraw from the study)
Any physical or intrusive intervention with the participant
(Including consumption of food or drinks)
Withholding any aspects of routine health treatment or care
A reasonable risk of disclosure of information requiring communication to another organisation
(e.g. abuse, criminal offences/illegal activity, unknown illness or disease)
Long distance travel to collect data
left0Section C: Participant Information
00Section C: Participant Information
This section focuses on gaining an understanding of how you will identify and recruit participants and whether what you are wishing to conduct is ethically sound. Please explain who you will recruit, why, how will you ensure their safety i.e. anonymity and any further ethical risks associated.
AUTOTEXTLIST t "This answer should also how you will gain access to, and approach participants. It should also identify any characteristics for exclusion from participation (e.g. risk of psychological discomfort, allergies, specific demographics). " * MERGEFORMAT C1 - How will potential participants be identified, approached and recruited?
(This must include the exclusion and inclusion criteria and justification for these. If you ticked any of the boxes in B5, please ensure you have considered the implications here). PLEASE NOTE: Clarify whether youre aiming to use your personal social media platform feeds (and state exactly which ones), or whether youre aiming to approach closed (e.g. Facebook) groups. If the latter, a gatekeeper approval letter is needed.
Identification:
To provide a varied sample, potential volunteers, male adolescents between the ages of 18-24, will be targeted using social media. Frequent usage of Instagram is emphasised in the inclusion criteria, whilst keeping the study scope narrow is the focus of the exclusion criteria.
Methods:
Participants will be recruited through the researchers personal social media platforms of Instagram and Snapchat. Participants will also be recruited via BCUs RPS scheme.
Exclusion and Inclusion Criteria:
To be included in the research participants must be aged 18-24 and must visit Instagram at a minimum of three times per week to be considered frequent users.
Mitigation Strategies:
The research places a strong emphasis on participant autonomy, open communication, and a voluntary withdrawal option in order to overcome power dynamics and coercion. The recruiting procedure places a high value on confidentiality and informed consent.
AUTOTEXTLIST t "Risk can involve: a) Direct impact of data collection; b) Researchers duty of care to prevent/ identify potential harm not caused by data collection; c) Conflicts of interest from disclosure of information (e.g. risking job security of interviewees)." * MERGEFORMAT C2 What are the potential physical and/or psychological risks or harm to participants?
(Please acknowledge the risks here and explain and elaborate on how you will mitigate these. Stating that there is no risk is not appropriate).
Yes, participants may be exposed to psychological concerns like as discomfort or emotional distress while considering their impressions of their bodies. The research uses a few techniques to reduce these risks. To provide fully informed consent, participants will first receive comprehensive information on the goal of the research and any possible emotional effects. Participants in the survey are guaranteed anonymity and confidentiality, and the questions are intentionally made to be delicate. Additionally, emphasis will be placed on providing a straightforward and readily available route for people to leave at any time without facing repercussions. In addition, contact details for mental health services will be given in case participants need additional support. These steps are intended to put participant welfare and moral behaviour first throughout the whole study process.
AUTOTEXTLIST t "The can involve any harm from participants or third parties in the vicinity, regardless of whether these individuals are known to the participant, or whether the harm is (un)intentional (e.g. psychological harm from disclosure of sensitive topics)." * MERGEFORMAT C3 - What are the potential physical and/or psychological risks or harm to research team (you and your supervisors)?
(Please acknowledge the risks here and explain and elaborate on how you will mitigate these. Stating that there is no risk is not appropriate).
Emotional strain from processing sensitive data on young males'well-being is one potential psychological danger for the study team. If the researcher is affected then they will make use of the counselling services available to them at Birmingham City University and will report all concerns or issues arising from this work with their supervisor.
AUTOTEXTLIST t "This can involves ensuring consent is (fully informed) where possible; situations where verbal consent may need to be added (e.g. working with young children) and circumstances with uncertainty regarding participant consent (e.g. field studies or online)." * MERGEFORMAT C4 - How will participants give informed consent freely?
(Please provide the consent form and participant information sheet with this ethics application)
A comprehensive Participant Information Sheet (PIS) detailing the goals, methods, and possible implications of the research will be provided to participants, who will then freely provide their informed permission. Voluntary involvement, the freedom to leave at any time without repercussions, and the guarantee of secrecy will all be highlighted in the PIS. Participants may declare their desire to participate on a separate consent form that will be provided. The form will make it very evident that participation is entirely voluntary, describe the nature and goals of the research, and restate the participant's right to withdraw. To enable participants todecide to and intelligently choose to engage in the research, both materials will be readily available and given in a language appropriate for the intended audience.
The consent form contains a number of separate checkboxes. Participants indicate they have given consent by
checking all of the checkboxes (including I agree to take part in this study).
C5 How will participants be informed of their right to withdraw their participation and/or data at any time during and after the study? Provide details of how you will achieve this:
Yes, participant Information Sheet and the debrief form, participants will be made aware of their ability to withdraw. They will be informed that in order to remove their anonymized data, they will need to provide their unique ID (see section D2). They may also stop participating in the online survey at any time by just shutting their browser; more details on this can be found on the Participant Information Sheet. Data that is removed will be erased right away. Participants will be informed that after April 30, 2024, they will no longer be able to remove their data since at that time the data will be examined and combined. The information page and debrief sheet make this very apparent.
AUTOTEXTLIST t "This can include financial, course credit or food/drink related. Consider any potential implications for validity of data, participant coercion or physical harm. " * MERGEFORMAT C6 Please provide details of any incentives to be offered to potential participants to encourage study participation. PLEASE NOTE: Only RPS points for BCU are permitted as an incentive. Any other incentives are not permitted at BSc or MSc level.
Participants will not receive any incentives, with the exception of those that complete the study via the RPS, in which case they will be awarded the appropriate number of credits for their time.
C7 - How will you inform participants about the outcomes of your research? (Participants have the right to request a SUMMARY of the results. They can request this by contacting you via your BCU email. You should only ever provide the participants with a brief anonymised summary of key results, and never the full dissertation or data).
Participants may use my BCU email address to get in contact with the researcher and seek further information if they want to learn more about the study's findings. The dissertation, individual questionnaire responses, or personal data will never be shared by the researcher; only an easy-to-understand overview of the main findings will be shared.
left0Section D: Data collection, storage and dissemination
00Section D: Data collection, storage and dissemination
This section requires you to detail: a) How you plan to collect your data and, b) How you will securely store it. You are required to inform the committee how you aim to minimise environmental risks when collecting data, in addition to discussing the steps that you will take to protect the data that will be collected.
AUTOTEXTLIST t "Consider implications of modality (e.g. online), premises (i.e. building) and geographical location (e.g. international) even if commonly frequented. Ensure data is not collected in private unless it is neutral to all individuals and a third party is near" * MERGEFORMAT D1 Please provide details regarding the proposed site(s) for data collection
(e.g. location(s) and timing of data collection, the hosting platform such Gorilla, QuestionPro, MS Teams, with reference to potential risks to participants and researchers posed by this)
All data will be collected online using QuestionPro. QuestionPro is a secure platform, where participants will be able to complete the survey in their own time and at a location suitable to them. The questionnaires can be completed on any compatible electronic device, such as a laptop, phone or tablet.
AUTOTEXTLIST t "Consider whether third parties will be able to access the data whilst being collected (e.g. overhearing during interviews) or whilst being stored, legitimately or not. Also consider whether participant data will be identifiable from the publication(s)" * MERGEFORMAT D2 - How will you ensure confidentiality (or anonymisation, if possible) in collecting, interpreting and storing data? (This includes ensuring confidentiality and anonymity for consent forms, main data and demographic information, as well as redacting potentially identifiable information in transcripts such as names or locations in qualitative research).
Unique identities will be assigned to consent forms and survey replies in place of personal information to ensure confidentiality. The study team will be the only ones having access to the safely kept data. In order to maintain anonymity, consent forms and survey results will be kept separate and only aggregate, anonymized data will be provided.
D3 - How will you disseminate the findings of your research? (E.g. written as part of your BSc/MSc dissertation, publication, conference presentations).
This project will be written up for a BSc Psychology final year dissertation. Submission for publication or conference presentation are both possible. Participants are requested to accept to this, since it is included on the consent form.
AUTOTEXTLIST t "Consider relevant legislation and university policy for data storage. Specify how data will be protected (e.g. locks, passwords) and who will have access to it." * MERGEFORMAT D4 - Where and for how long will data be stored? (Please refer to the flowchart on Moodle for guidance on length of retention for consent form and data. Clearly state where the data will be stored and who has access to the data and consent forms).
All data will be collected via QuestionPro which will then be exported onto a password protected computer and saved onto the researchers BCU OneDrive account. Data will be deleted from the QuestionPro and Downloads folders once uploaded to OneDrive. The OneDrive folder with data and consent forms (stored in separate sub- folders) will be shared with my supervisor. Although the data will be accessed on OneDrive through my personal device it will not be stored on my personal device.
A record of consent (Excel spreadsheet for each participant and their response to each checkbox) will be stored on OneDrive in a folder separate to the anonymised study data. Access to this folder will be shared only with my supervisor, in line with the Universitys BLSS Data Retention Policy.
As I am hoping to publish the results of this data, the consent forms will be stored securely for 3 years (until September 2026) and collected data will be stored securely for 10 years (until September 2033), which is in line with the Data Retention Policy at BCU.
left0Checklist and declarations
00Checklist and declarations
Appendices checklist
Participant Information Sheet (if working with children, you will also need a child version of the PIS).
Yes
Participant consent form (if working with children, you will need a parental consent form and a child assent form)
Yes
Participant debrief
Yes
Research materials (e.g. Copies of questionnaires, interviews, vignettes and other research tools)
Yes
Recruitment text and/or poster(s)
Yes
Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) certification (if required)
No
Approval letter from external organisations (including gatekeeper or admin approvals)
No
Researcher(s) declaration
In signing this research ethics application form I(we) confirm the following:
That the form is accurate and completed to the best of my(our) knowledge.
If the research is approved then I(we) will adhere to the terms of the full application and if there are to be any changes to the project I(we) will seek an amendment from the committee.
I(we) understand that must share my consent forms and main data set with my supervisor(s) via BCU OneDrive
I(we) understand that if Im using software such as QuestionPro, Gorilla or Microsoft Forms I must collaborate my project with my supervisors
I(we) understand that research records/data may be subject to inspection for audit and compliance purposes.
I(we) understand this application and any additional documentation will be retained for 5 years post the end of the project.
I(we) understand that if Im intending to use the Psychology Lab, I am aware of the standard operating procedures
Signed by Muhammad Osama Khan
Date
29/11/2023
Supervisor declaration
In signing this research ethics application form I confirm the following:
I am satisfied that the scientific content of the research is satisfactory for an educational qualification at this level.
I take responsibility for working with the student named above to ensure that this study is conducted in accordance with the relevant disciplinary ethical guidelines.
I will ensure that the student seeks an amendment from the Psychology Research Ethics Committee (psychethics@bcu.ac.uk) before implementing substantial amendments to the protocol or to the terms of the full application of which the Committee has given a favourable opinion.
Signed by Click here to enter text.Date
01/12/2023
Appendices
*Delete or add as appropriate
Participant Information Sheet (PIS)
PARTICIPANT INFORMATION SHEET
Examining the Impact of Instagram on the Body Image Perceptions and Self-acceptance of Adolescent Males
STUDY BACKGROUND
You are being asked to take part in a research study on the impact of Instagram on body image perceptions and self-acceptance. My name is Muhammad Osama Khan, a third-year Birmingham City University student studying Psychology. This research is being supervised by Helen Egan, a Professor at Birmingham City University. This project has been approved by the Psychology Research Ethics Committee.
WHAT WILL YOU NEED TO DO?
In order to participate, you must answer a structured online survey on yourInstagram interactions and experiences. The survey will ask about your mindfulness, interactions with Instagram posts, and thoughts on body image. It should take around [10-15 minutes] to finish this. We much appreciate your insightful and sincere answers, which have helped us better understand how social media affects the well-beingof young males. You have complete control over the activity and are free to stop at any time without repercussions. We appreciate your consideration of taking part in this important research.
WHO IS ELIGIBLE TO TAKE PART?
You must be between the ages of 18-24, male, and a UK resident and use Instagram at least 3 times per week to take part in this study. Please consider whether you might find the topics of body image and self-acceptance distressing or upsetting. If so, you may not want to take part.
HOW LONG WILL THE STUDY LAST?
On average, this study takes 10-15 minutes.
ARE THERE ANY RISKS OF TAKING PART?
It may be a little uncomfortable to dwell on those views around body image while taking part in this survey. The survey is meant to be non-intrusive toreduce that, and you are free to stop participating at any moment without facing any repercussions. If it is necessary to receive further assistance, I providethe contact details for mental health services. I value your well-being and will keep your answers private. Kindly get in touch with the researcher at [__muhammad.khan34@mail.bcu.ac.uk_] if you have any questions. The unpaid participation is essential to expanding our knowledge of how social media affects teenage wellbeing.
WHO TO CONTACT IF YOU ARE AFFECTED BY THE TOPIC OR CONTENT OF THIS STUDY If you feel distressed or upset as a result of taking part in the study, below are some services which
are free and might be helpful:
BEAT
Beat Eating Disorders provides support to not only those with an Eating Disorder but also Family and
Friends too.
Website: https://www.beateatingdisorders.org.uk/
Helpline: 0808 801 0677
Email: help@beateatingdisorders.org.ukMind
This service provides advice and support to empower anyone experiencing a mental health problem, you
can contact them 24/7.
Website: https://www.mind.org.uk/ Helpline: 0300 123 3393 Email: info@mind.org.uk
ARE THERE ANY BENEFITS OF TAKING PART?
As a BCU Psychology student, you will obtain 3 credits via the Research involvement Scheme for your involvement, even if there are no direct advantages.
YOUR RIGHT TO WITHDRAW AND WITHHOLD INFORMATION
As per the guidelines provided by the British Psychological Society, you have the right to withdraw from the research project at any point and without giving a reason. You are still eligible for the same rewards as someone who finishes the course. You may also request the withdrawal of your data between now and 30/04/2024, at which point it will have been analysed and will no longer be available for withdrawal. In order to withdraw prior to this date, kindly refer to the contact information provided below. In order to withdraw from the questionnaire, you will be required to create an anonymous code at the beginning of the form.
During the study, you also have the right to omit or refuse to answer or respond to any question that is asked of you. You can also withdraw from the study while you are completing it by closing the browser. If you have already completed the study, you can contact the researcher using the email address below, requesting your data to be withdrawn.
YOUR RIGHT TO CONFIDENTIALITY/ANONYMITY
The study will not involve the collection of any personal information about you except your age and gender.
No other identifiable information will be stored. Your data will be stored using an anonymous ID code. You will be given instructions on how to create this at the beginning of the study.
All data will be stored in accordance with the University Data Protection Policy. Data will be anonymised and will only be shared between the primary researcher and the supervisor, but it will not be possible to identify your data at any point. The data will be kept until the degree classification has been awarded, after which point it will be stored securely for 10 years for potential publication purposes. If you decide you would like to withdraw your data before 30th April 2024, you will need to provide the anonymous ID code you created at the start of the study and contact me by email (Muhammad.khan34@mail.bcu.ac.uk).
WHO IS ORGANISING THE RESEARCH?
Participants are able to contact me by email at muhammad.khan34@mail.bcu.ac.uk or my supervisor Professor Helen Egan by email at helen.egan@bcu.ac.uk if you require further information or wish to exercise your right to withdraw.
If you are unhappy at any point in the study, or if there is a problem, please contact the Psychology Research Ethics Committee directly at psychethics@bcu.ac.uk.
If you have any questions, comments or concerns about how we use or handle your information please contact the Data Protection Officer at: Data Protection Officer, Information Management Team, Birmingham City University, University House, 15 Bartholomew Row, Birmingham B5 5JU, email informationmanagement@bcu.ac.uk or call +44 (0) 121 331 5288.
Participant Consent Form
PARTICIPANT CONSENT FORM
Examining the Impact of Instagram on the Body Image Perceptions and Self-esteem of Adolescent Males
BRIEF SUMMARY OF PROJECT
The aim of the research is to investigate in-depth how Instagram affects mindfulness and self-acceptance of adolescent males bodies. The results of the research will advance knowledge of the complex connections between psychological health, Instagram engagement, and content. The study ends with practical suggestions for teachers, parents, and social media companies to address and lessen the potential damage that body image content may do to male teenagers' self-esteem. The study aims that by performing this investigation, it will be able to provide insightful information that will help create a welcoming and encouraging online space for male adolescents to overcome the challenges of social media.
In order to participate in this study, we need to ensure that you understand the nature of the research, as outlined on the Participant Information Sheet. Please tick the boxes to indicate that you understand and agree to the following conditions.
I confirm that I have read the information sheet for this study. I have had the opportunity to consider the information, ask questions and have had these answered satisfactorily.
I understand that in order to take part in this study, I should identify as male, be between the ages of 18 and 24, and use Instagram at least three times per week
I understand that this project will deal with body image perceptions and self-esteem and
that I have been advised that my I should not participate if this may cause them
distress.
I understand that personal data about me will be collected for the purposes of the research study including age and gender, and that these will be processed in accordance with the information sheet.
I understand that my participation is voluntary and that I am free to withdraw at any time until 30th April 2024 without giving any reason.
I understand that my data is anonymous and will only be stored on secure Birmingham City University servers for up to 10 years.
I understand that my data will be shared with the researchers supervisor, and my anonymised data might be shared with other University officials for audit and verification purposes and that there is a possibility this research will be presented at conferences or published in journal publications.
I agree to take part in this study
PLEASE CREATE A PERSONAL IDENTIFIER CODE:
This should be made up of the first 2 letters of the street you grew up on, followed by the last three letters of your favourite colour e.g. if your favourite colour is yellow and you grew up on Salisbury Ave your code would be SALOW
__________________________
Participant Debrief
DEBRIEFING SHEET
Thank you for taking part in this study! Your time is really appreciated.
SUMMARY OF PROJECT
The aim of the research is to investigate in-depth how Instagram affects mindfulness and self-acceptance of adolescent males bodies. The results of the research will advance knowledge of the complex connections between psychological health, Instagram engagement, and content. The study ends with practical suggestions for teachers, parents, and social media companies to address and lessen the potential damage that body image content may do to male teenagers' self-esteem. The study aims that by performing this investigation, it will be able to provide insightful information that will help create a welcoming and encouraging online space for male adolescents to overcome the challenges of social media.
Participating in this survey will be very helpful in gaining insights that will help us better understand the difficulties that young people in the digital age confront. We appreciate everything that you have done to further our understanding of this important field of study.
WHO TO CONTACT IF YOU ARE AFFECTED BY THE TOPIC OR CONTENT OF THIS STUDY
If you feel distressed or upset as a result of taking part in the study, below are some services which are free and might be helpful:
BEAT
Beat Eating Disorders provides support to not only those with an eating disorder, but also Family and Friends too.
Website: https://www.beateatingdisorders.org.uk/
Helpline: 0808 801 0677
Email: help@beateatingdisorders.org.uk
Mind
This service provides advice and support to empower anyone experiencing a mental health problem, you can contact them 24/7.
Website: https://www.mind.org.uk/
Helpline: 0300 123 3393
Email: info@mind.org.uk
KEEPING IN TOUCH
Please note that you have the right to withdraw your data from this study up until 30/04/2024. To withdraw all you will need to do is email me on Muhammad.khan34@mail.bcu.ac.uk using the anonymous code that you created during the questionnaire and simply ask that your data be withdrawn. You can also email me at the below address to find out the results of this research or any publications that arise from the study.
ANY MORE QUESTIONS?
We hope that you enjoyed participating in this study. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact the researchers at the address below.
Muhammad Khan (Researcher) Muhammad.khan34@mail.bcu.ac.uk Professor Helen Egan (Supervisor) Helen.Egan@bcu.ac.uk
If you are unhappy at any point in the study, or if there is a problem, please contact the Psychology Research Ethics Committee directly at psychethics@bcu.ac.uk.
If you have any questions, comments or concerns about how we use or handle your information please contact the Data Protection Officer at: Data Protection Officer, Information Management Team, Birmingham City University, University House, 15 Bartholomew Row, Birmingham B5 5JU, email informationmanagement@bcu.ac.uk or call +44 (0) 121 331 5288.
Research Materials Demographics questions
Age question:
How old are you (in years)?
__________________ -1905059690 Prefer not to sayGender question:
Which of the following describes how you think of yourself?
a. Female
b. Male
c. Non-binaryd. I prefer not to say
e. I would prefer to self-describe:
Research Materials Others (e.g., Interview Schedule, Questionnaires, Scales, etc.)
The Multidimensional Instagram Intensity Scale (MFIS) Mantzios & Keyte (2018)
Please read each statement carefully before answering.Indicate how often you agree with the following statements ranging from1 (never)to5 (always).
Click the appropriate number beside each statement.
If I could visit only one site on the Internet, it would be Instagram.1 2 3 4 5
I feel bad if I don't check my Instagram daily. 1 2 3 4 5
I often search for Internet connection in order to visit Instagram. 1 2 3 4 5
Before going to sleep, I check Instagram once more. 1 2 3 4 5
Watching Instagram posts is good for overcoming boredom. 1 2 3 4 5
When I'm bored, I often go to Instagram. 1 2 3 4 5
If I'm bored, I open Instagram. 1 2 3 4 5
I spend time on Instagram at the expense of my obligations. 1 2 3 4 5
I spend more time on Instagram than I would like to. 1 2 3 4 5
It happens that I use Instagram instead of sleeping. 1 2 3 4 5
My Instagram profile is rather detailed. 1 2 3 4 5
I like refining my Instagram profile. 1 2 3 4 5
It is important for me to update my Instagram profile regularly. 1 2 3 4 5
Coding Key:
_____ Persistence (1, 2, 3, 4)
_____ Boredom (5, 6, 7)
_____ Overuse (8, 9, 10)
_____ Self-expression (11, 12, 13)
TheBody Image Acceptance and Action Questionnaire-5
FFMQ-15: 15-item Five-Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire
Never or very rarely true Rarely true Sometimes
true Often true Very often or always true
1. When I take a shower or a bath, I stay alert to the sensations of water on my body.
1
2
3
4
5
2. Im good at finding words to describe my feelings. 1 2 3 4
5
3. I dont pay attention to what Im doing because Im daydreaming, worrying, or otherwise distracted.
1
2
3
4
5
4. I believe some of my thoughts are abnormal or bad and I shouldnt think that way.
1
2
3
4
5
5. When I have distressing thoughts or images, I step back and am aware of the thought or image without getting taken over by it.
1
2
3
4
5
6. I notice how foods and drinks affect my thoughts, bodily sensations, and emotions.
1
2
3
4
5
7. I have trouble thinking of the right words to express how I feel about things.
1
2
3
4
5
8. I do jobs or tasks automatically without being aware of what Im doing.
1
2
3
4
5
9. I think some of my emotions are bad or inappropriate and I shouldnt feel them.
1
2 3 4 5
10. When I have distressing thoughts or images I am able just to notice them without reacting.
1
2
3
4
5
11. I pay attention to sensations, such as the wind in my hair or sun on my face.
1
2
3
4
5
12. Even when Im feeling terribly upset I can find a way to put it into words.
1
2
3
4
5
13. I find myself doing things without paying attention.
1
2
3
4
5
14.
I tell myself I shouldnt be feeling the way Im feeling.
1
2
3
4
5
15. When I have distressing thoughts or images I just notice them and let them go.
1
2
3
4
5
Approval Letter(s), Gatekeeper/Admin approval and Recruitment text
Recruitment Text
My name is Muhammad, I am a third year Psychology student doing my dissertation on Examining The Impact of Instagram on the Body Image Perceptions and Self-Acceptance of Adolescent Males. If you are a male aged 18-24 and a user of Instagram, please consider taking part in my study. You will be asked to complete three questionnaires on Instagram usage, body acceptance and mindfulness. This should only take 10-15 minutes of your time. If you find the topics of body acceptance and mindfulness distressing, you are encouraged not to take part. Thank you!
Other
