CAIE_AS_知识填空_答案_20240709.docx

Content {#content.TOC} ======= [[Research Methods] 6](#research-methods) [[Research process] 6](#research-process) [[Sampling technique] 7](#sampling-technique) [[Data] 8](#data) [[Data analysis] 9](#data-analysis) [[Graphs] 9](#graphs) [[Ethics] 9](#ethics) [[Variables] 11](#variables) [[C...

Content {#content.TOC} ======= [[Research Methods] 6](#research-methods) [[Research process] 6](#research-process) [[Sampling technique] 7](#sampling-technique) [[Data] 8](#data) [[Data analysis] 9](#data-analysis) [[Graphs] 9](#graphs) [[Ethics] 9](#ethics) [[Variables] 11](#variables) [[Controls] 12](#controls) [[Evaluation] 13](#evaluation) [[Experiment] 14](#experiment) [[Observation] 16](#observation) [[Issue and debate] 17](#issue-and-debate) [[Study Details] 18](#study-details) [[Biological approach] 18](#biological-approach) [[Definition] 18](#definition) [[Dement and Kleitman (Brain Scan)] 18](#dement-and-kleitman-brain-scan) [[Psychology being investigated] 18](#psychology-being-investigated) [[Background] 18](#background) [[Aims] 19](#aims) [[Research methods] 19](#research-methods-1) [[Results] 20](#results) [[Conclusion] 21](#conclusion) [[Evaluation] 21](#evaluation-1) [[Issue and debate] 23](#issue-and-debate-1) [[Link to assumption] 23](#link-to-assumption) [[Holzel et al (Mindfulness and Brain Scan) -- New Study] 23](#holzel-et-al-mindfulness-and-brain-scan-new-study) [[Psychology being investigated] 23](#psychology-being-investigated-1) [[Background] 25](#background-1) [[Aim] 26](#aim) [[Research Methods] 26](#research-methods-2) [[Result] 27](#result) [[Conclusion] 28](#conclusion-1) [[Evaluation of the research] 28](#evaluation-of-the-research) [[Issue and debate] 30](#issue-and-debate-2) [[Link to assumptions] 30](#link-to-assumptions) [[Hasset et al. -- New Study] 30](#hasset-et-al.-new-study) [[Psychology being investigated] 30](#psychology-being-investigated-2) [[Background] 31](#background-2) [[Aim] 31](#aim-1) [[Research methods] 32](#research-methods-3) [[Results] 33](#results-1) [[Conclusion] 34](#conclusion-2) [[Evaluation] 35](#evaluation-2) [[Issues and debates] 36](#issues-and-debates) [[Links to assumptions] 37](#links-to-assumptions) [[Cognitive approach] 37](#cognitive-approach) [[Definition] 37](#definition-1) [[Pozzulo et al., -- New Study] 38](#pozzulo-et-al.-new-study) [[Psychology being investigated] 38](#psychology-being-investigated-3) [[Background] 38](#background-3) [[Aims] 38](#aims-1) [[Research methods] 39](#research-methods-4) [[Results] 42](#results-2) [[Conclusion] 42](#conclusion-3) [[Evaluation] 43](#evaluation-3) [[Issue and debate] 44](#issue-and-debate-3) [[Linked to assumption] 45](#linked-to-assumption) [[Andrade et al.] 46](#andrade-et-al.) [[Psychology being investigated] 46](#psychology-being-investigated-4) [[Background] 46](#background-4) [[Aims (on 18,19,20 tests)] 46](#aims-on-181920-tests) [[Research methods] 47](#research-methods-5) [[Results (on 18,19,20,21 tests)] 48](#results-on-18192021-tests) [[Conclusion (on 21 test)] 49](#conclusion-on-21-test) [[Evaluation] 49](#evaluation-4) [[Issues and debates] 50](#issues-and-debates-1) [[Link to assumption] 51](#link-to-assumption-1) [[Baron-cohen et al.] 52](#baron-cohen-et-al.) [[Psychology being investigated] 52](#psychology-being-investigated-5) [[Background] 52](#background-5) [[Aims] 52](#aims-2) [[Research methods] 52](#research-methods-6) [[Results (on 19,20,24 tests)] 56](#results-on-192024-tests) [[Conclusion (on 20 test)] 57](#conclusion-on-20-test) [[Evaluation (on 18,19,20, 21, 22 tests)] 57](#evaluation-on-181920-21-22-tests) [[Issue and debate] 58](#issue-and-debate-4) [[Linked to assumption (on 18, 24 tests)] 59](#linked-to-assumption-on-18-24-tests) [[Learning approach] 59](#learning-approach) [[Definition] 59](#definition-2) [[Fagen et al. (elephant learning) -- New Study] 59](#fagen-et-al.-elephant-learning-new-study) [[Psychology being investigated] 59](#psychology-being-investigated-6) [[Background] 60](#background-6) [[Aims] 61](#aims-3) [[Research methods] 61](#research-methods-7) [[Results] 64](#results-3) [[Conclusion] 64](#conclusion-4) [[Evaluation] 64](#evaluation-5) [[Issues and Debates] 66](#issues-and-debates-2) [[Link to assumptions] 67](#link-to-assumptions-1) [[Bandura et al. (Aggression)] 68](#bandura-et-al.-aggression) [[Psychology being investigated] 68](#psychology-being-investigated-7) [[Background] 68](#background-7) [[Aim (On 19 test)] 68](#aim-on-19-test) [[Research methods] 68](#research-methods-8) [[Result] 72](#result-1) [[Conclusion (on 18,21 test)] 73](#conclusion-on-1821-test) [[Evaluation (on 18,19,20,21,23 test)] 73](#evaluation-on-1819202123-test) [[Issue and debate] 75](#issue-and-debate-5) [[Link to assumption] 76](#link-to-assumption-2) [[Saavedra & Silverman (button phobia)] 77](#saavedra-silverman-button-phobia) [[Psychology being investigated] 77](#psychology-being-investigated-8) [[Background] 77](#background-8) [[Aim] 78](#aim-2) [[Research methods] 78](#research-methods-9) [[Behavioral exposures - *in vivo* exposure (On 18,20 tests)] 79](#behavioral-exposures---in-vivo-exposure-on-1820-tests) [[Behavior exposure result] 80](#behavior-exposure-result) [[Imagery exposure therapy - *in vitro* exposure] 80](#imagery-exposure-therapy---in-vitro-exposure) [[Imagery exposure results] 81](#imagery-exposure-results) [[Posttreatment and follow-up procedure and results (On 20 test)] 81](#posttreatment-and-follow-up-procedure-and-results-on-20-test) [[Conclusion] 81](#conclusion-5) [[Evaluation] 81](#evaluation-6) [[Issue and debate] 83](#issue-and-debate-6) [[Link to Assumption] 84](#link-to-assumption-3) [[Social approach] 84](#social-approach) [[Definition] 84](#definition-3) [[Milgram et al. (obedience)] 84](#milgram-et-al.-obedience) [[Psychology being investigated] 84](#psychology-being-investigated-9) [[Aim] 85](#aim-3) [[Methods] 85](#methods) [[Results] 89](#results-4) [[Conclusion] 89](#conclusion-6) [[Evaluation] 90](#evaluation-7) [[Issues and debates] 91](#issues-and-debates-3) [[Link to assumption] 92](#link-to-assumption-4) [[Perry et al. (personal space) -- New Study] 93](#perry-et-al.-personal-space-new-study) [[Psychology being investigated] 93](#psychology-being-investigated-10) [[Background] 93](#background-9) [[Aim] 94](#aim-4) [[Method:] 94](#method) [[Results] 97](#results-5) [[Conclusion] 98](#conclusion-7) [[Evaluation] 98](#evaluation-8) [[Issues and debates] 99](#issues-and-debates-4) [[Link to assumption] 100](#link-to-assumption-5) [[Piliavin et al. (Subway Samaritans)] 100](#piliavin-et-al.-subway-samaritans) [[Psychology being investigated] 100](#psychology-being-investigated-11) [[Background] 101](#background-10) [[Aim] 101](#aim-5) [[Research methods] 101](#research-methods-10) [[Results] 106](#results-6) [[Conclusion] 107](#conclusion-8) [[Evaluation] 107](#evaluation-9) [[Issues and Debates] 109](#issues-and-debates-5) [[Link to assumption] 109](#link-to-assumption-6) Research Methods {#research-methods.Approach} ================ Research process {#research-process.Studysubsection} ================ 1. Aim: the purpose of the investigation 1. [Correlational aims]: to investigate a link between variable A and variable B 2. [Experimental aims]: to investigate whether IV Lv.1 or IV Lv.2 affect DV more 2. Hypothesis 3. A testable predicting statements 4. Directional hypothesis: a statement predicting the direction of a relationship between variables 5. 6. 7. Non-directional hypothesis: hypothesis predicts that there will be an effect, but not the direction of that effect 8. 9. 10. Null hypothesis: a testable statement saying that any difference or correlation in the results is due to chance 11. 12. - Sampling technique {#sampling-technique.Studysubsection} ================== +-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+ | Sampling | Definition | Strengths | Weaknesses | | technique | | | | +=================+=================+=================+=================+ | Opportunity | - Using | - Quicker and | - Low | | sampling | participant | easier | generalisab | | | s | | ility | | | who are | - Big sample | | | | available | size, could | | | | at the time | be more | | | | | generalized | | | | - Passers | | | | | by/student | | | | | in the | | | | | researcher\ | | | | | 's | | | | | class | | | +-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+ | Volunteer | - Using a | - Low | - Similar | | sampling | request | drop-out | peoplelow | | | asking | rate | generalisab | | | people to | | ility | | | join in | - Participant | | | | | come to the | | | | - Through | experimente | | | | advertiseme | r | | | | nts/email/post/ | which is | | | | online | easy | | | | questionnai | | | | | re | - Highly | | | | | motivated | | | | | so that | | | | | they will | | | | | put more | | | | | effect into | | | | | the task | | | | | | | | | | - Can be | | | | | specific | | | | | about | | | | | participant | | | | | s | | | | | characteris | | | | | tic | | +-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+ | Random sampling | - Each | - Likely to | - Limited by | | | individual | obtain a | population | | | in the | range of | chosencanno | | | population | different | t | | | has an | ages, could | be | | | equal | be more | generalized | | | chance of | generalized | to other | | | being | | school | | | selected | - | | | | | | | | | - Random | | | | | number | | | | | generator/r | | | | | andom | | | | | number | | | | | table/takin | | | | | g | | | | | numbers | | | | | from a | | | | | hat/name | | | | | List | | | +-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+ Data {#data.Studysubsection} ==== +-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+ | Data type | Definition | Strengths | Weaknesses | +=================+=================+=================+=================+ | Quantitative | - Numerical | - Objective | - No in-depth | | data | | | information | | | - For | - No need to | | | (Numerical) | example, | interpret | - Reason | | | pulse rate | | behind | | | or a score | - Easy to | their | | | on an | compare and | behavior | | | intelligenc | analyse | | | | e | | | | | test. | | | +-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+ | Qualitative | - Descriptive | - Can express | - Data | | data | | rather than | collection | | | - In-depth | limited by | is | | (Descriptive) | results | fixed | subjective | | | indicating | choices | | | | the quality | | - Not | | | of a | - Unusual | generalized | | | psychologic | response | | | | al | can be | | | | characteris | noticed | | | | tic, | | | | | such as | | | | | responses | | | | | to open | | | | | questions | | | | | in | | | | | self-report | | | | | s | | | | | or case | | | | | studies and | | | | | detailed | | | | | observation | | | | | s. | | | +-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+ {#section.Studysubsection} Data analysis {#data-analysis.Studysubsection} ============= 3. Measure of central tendency 13. Definition: a mathematical way to find the typical or average score from a data set, using the mode, median or mean 14. Mode 15. Most frequent score(s) in a data set 16. Median 17. Middle score of a data set which is in rank order (smallest to largest). If there are two numbers in the middle they are added together and divided by two. 18. Mean 19. Adding up all the scores and divided by the number of scores in the data set 4. Measure of spread 20. Definition: Mathematical way to describe the variation or dispersion within a data set 21. Range 22. The difference between the biggest and smallest values 23. Standard deviation 24. Bigger values indicate greater variation (a measure of spread) 25. A calculation of the average difference between each score in the data set and the mean Graphs {#graphs.Studysubsection} ====== 1. Bar chart 26. A graph used for data in discrete categories and total or average scores. There are gaps between each bar that is plotted on the graph because the columns are not related in a linear way 5. Histogram 27. A graph used to illustrate continuous data, e.g. to show the distribution of a set of scores. It has a bar for each score value, or group of scores, along the x-axis. The y-axis has frequency of each category 2. Scatter graph 28. A way to display data from a correlational study. Each point on the graph represents the point where one participant\'s score on each scale for the two measured variables cross Ethics {#ethics.Studysubsection} ====== 1. Human participants 29. Informed consent 30. Definition: knowing enough about the study to decide whether you want to agree to participate 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. Deception 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. Debriefing 41. Definition: giving participants a full explanation of the aims and potential consequences of the study at the end of a study so that they leave in at least as positive a condition as they arrived 42. Protection from harm 43. Physical harm 44. 45. 46. Psychological harm 47. 48. 49. Right to withdraw 50. Definition: Participants can leave a study at any time 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. Confidentiality 56. Definition: Ensuring participants\' information is anonymous/safe/not made public 57. 58. 59. Privacy 60. Definition: not invading a person\'s thoughts or space participant they don\'t want to share 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. Animal participant 67. Replacement 68. Definition: choosing not to use animals/to use a species that will suffer less 69. 70. Species and strain 71. Definition: least likely suffer pain and distress + fulfill the aim 72. 73. 74. 75. 76. 77. 78. Number of animals 79. Definition: the smallest number of animals possible should be used 80. 81. Procedure: pain and distress 82. Definition: Research causing death, disease, injury, physiological or psychological distress or discomfort should be avoided 83. Housing 84. Definition: should house to provide essential needs for species/age/sex/reproductive stage/activity level 85. 86. 87. 88. 89. 90. 91. 92. Reward 93. Definition: motives for animals should be pleasant (reinforcement) rather than unpleasant (punishment/deprivation) 94. 95. 96. 97. 98. Some veterinary procedures 99. Anaesthesia 麻醉（手术用) 100. Analgesia 止痛药（慢性病) 101. Euthanasia 安乐死（病不好） Variables {#variables.Studysubsection} ========= 1. Dependent variables 102. Definition: the factor in an experiment which is measured and is expected to change under the influence of the IV 2. Independent variables 103. Definition: the factor that is manipulated by the experimenter and expected to cause a change in the DV 104. A difference in the condition that is compared 105. The factor under investigation in an experiment which is manipulated to create two or more conditions (levels) and is expected to be responsible for changes in the dependent variable 106. Extraneous variables 107. Definition: any variables that can affect DV (other than IV); 108. These are variables that can influence the relationship between the IV and DV. They can affect the outcome of an experiment but they are not the variables of interest 109. Types 110. Participants variables: changes caused by individual differences 111. Situational variables: changes caused by an aspect of the environment 112. Random variables: affects DV in all levels of IV 113. Systematic variables: affects DV in the only level of IV (confounding variable) 114. Confounding variables: can obscure the effect of the IV, making the results difficult to interpret 115. Uncontrolled variables: Variables that cannot be controlled by a researcher; includes participants variables and situational variables 116. Operationalisation 117. Definition: the definition of variables so that they can be accurately manipulated, measured or quantified and replicated. This includes the IV and DV in experiments and the two measured variables in correlations Controls {#controls.Studysubsection} ======== 1. Definition: ways to keep potential confounding variables constant 2. Increased controls is to prevent: 118. Demand characteristics: features of the experimental situation which give away the aims. They can cause participants to try to change their behavior 119. Order effect: are consequences of doing tasks/tests more than once (definition) (On 24 test) 120. Examples: 121. 122. 123. Types 124. 125. 126. 127. 128. 129. 130. Can be overcome through counterbalancing 131. 132. Evaluation {#evaluation.Studysubsection} ========== 1. Validity 133. Definition: the extent to which the researcher is testing what they claim to be testing 134. Internal validity 135. 136. 2. Reliability 137. Definition: the extent to which a procedure, task or measure is consistent 138. Type 139. Test-retest reliability: consistency between test 140. 141. Inter-rater reliability: consistency between interpreter 142. 143. Generalizability & Representativeness 144. Population 145. All the people who could be used in the study 146. An entire group of people who share something in common 147. The people whom the result of the study will be used to represent 148. Sample 149. The participants who are used in the study 150. A selection of population from whom the results will be generalized and should represent the population 151. Population validity 152. Whether the result could be generalized to other members of the population 153. Ecological validity 154. Setting is not artificial 155. Result could be generalized to real life setting 156. Mundane realism 157. Task is not artificial 158. Result could be generalized to real-life behavior Experiment {#experiment.Studysubsection} ========== 1. Definition: an investigation looking for a causal relationship in which an IV is manipulated and DV is measured under the change of IV 2. Conditions 159. Experimental condition 160. \>1 of the situations in an experiment which represent different 161. Levels of the IV levels are compared (or compared to a control condition) 162. Control condition 163. A level of the IV in an experiment from which the IV is absent 164. It is compared to one or more experimental conditions and set as a baseline 3. Experimental design 165. Definition: the way in which participants are allocated to levels of the IV - 166. Major Experimental Design Methods +-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+ | Study design | Definition | Strengths | Weaknesses | +=================+=================+=================+=================+ | Repeated | - Same | - Less effect | - Greater | | measure design | participant | of | exposure to | | | s | participant | demand | | | do every | variables | characteris | | | level of | | tics | | | the IV | - Uses fewer | | | | | participant | - More order | | | | s | effect | +-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+ | Independent | - Each | - No order | - More effect | | measure design | participant | effects | of | | | does only 1 | | individual | | | level of | - Less effect | differences | | | the IV | of demand | | | | | characteris | | | | - There are | tics | | | | different | | | | | participant | | | | | s | | | | | in | | | | | different | | | | | conditions | | | +-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+ | Matched pair | - Arranged | - Reducing | - Hard to | | design | into pairs | the effect | choose the | | | based on | of demand | matching | | | similaritie | characteris | criteria | | | s | tics | | | | | | - Smaller | | | - 1 member of | - Less effect | sample size | | | each pair | of | | | | performs at | participant | | | | a different | variables | | | | level of | | | | | the IV | - No order | | | | | effect | | +-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+ 167. Observation {#observation.Studysubsection} =========== 1. Naturalistic vs. controlled 168. Naturalistic 169. No manipulation/interference with the environment 170. Conducted in real life environment/normal setting 171. Controlled observation 172. Researcher create the setting 173. Control the opportunities for the participants\' behaviour 2. Structured vs. Unstructured 174. Structured 175. Structured observations use [behavior checklists;] So it is more reliable than unstructured observation; 176. They collect quantitative data; 177. They can be used as a technique to **measure the DV in experiments** 178. Unstructured observation: 179. An unstructured observation records all behaviours 180. 181. 182. Covert vs. Overt observation 183. Covert observation 184. the participants are unaware of role / existence of the observer 185. Overt observation 186. the role of the observer is obvious to the participants; such as if they are holding a clipboard 187. Participant vs. non-participant observation 188. Participant observation 189. Researcher watches as part of the ongoing activity; appears to be like the participants in social role; 190. 191. 192. 193. Non-participant observation 194. observer not involved in situation being studied; uses camera / one-way mirror / distanced from social group; 195. 196. 197. Issue and debate {#issue-and-debate.Approach} ================ 1. Nature vs. Nurture 198. Nature 199. Behavior, emotion and cognition process could result from nature (innate, genetic factor) 200. Nurture 201. Behavior, emotion and cognition process could result from environmental influence 202. Individual vs. Situational 203. Individual 204. Personality or physiological factors that unique to them that could influence the explanations 205. Situational 206. Situation within the setting that could influence the explanations s Study Details ------------- Biological approach =================== Definition ========== 1. Behavior, cognition and emotion can be explained in terms of the working of brain, effect of the hormone, genetic and evolution 2. Similarity and differences between people can be understood in terms of biological factors and their interactions with other factors Dement and Kleitman (Brain Scan) ================================ Psychology being investigated {#psychology-being-investigated.Studysubsection} ============================= 1. EEG 207. Record brain wave activity 208. Frequency 209. Amplitude 2. EOG 210. Electrical recording of eye movement by measuring muscles around the eyes 3. REM vs. nREM 211. Rapid eye movement sleep (REM): 212. A stage of sleep in which our eyes move rapidly under the lids, which is associated with vivid, visual dreams 213. Non-rapid eye movement sleep (nREM): 214. The stages of sleep (1 to 4) in which our eyes are still. It is also called quiescent (quiet) sleep. This is not associated with dreaming 4. Ultradian Rhythms 215. Biological rhythms which repeat more frequently than once a day are called ultradian rhythms and the sleep stages are a good example of these as, in healthy adults, a full cycle takes roughly 90 minutes Background {#background.Studysubsection} ========== 1. Aserinsky and Kleitman (1955) 216. Observed period of REM during sleep 217. High incidence of dream recall in participant awakened during REM 5. Dement (1955) 218. Occurrence of REM observed in both normal & schizophrenic participant 3. Dement and Kleitman (1955) 219. REM appeared at regular intervals in relation to a cyclic change in the depth of sleep during night as measured by the EEG Aims {#aims.Studysubsection} ==== 1. To investigate if dream recall differs between REM & nREM stages of sleep 220. To investigate if there is a (positive) correlation between subjective estimates of dream duration and the length of the REM sleep 221. To investigate if eye movement patterns related to dream content Research methods {#research-methods-1.Studysubsection} ================ 1. Sample 222. 9 adults participants (7 males+2 females) 223. 5 were studied intensively (6-17 nights, 50-77 awakenings) 224. 4 were used to confirm the result (1-2 nights, 4-10 awakening) 225. Design 226. Study 1 227. Natural experiment, conducted in a laboratory) 228. 229. repeated measure design 230. IV: REM sleep/nREM sleep 231. DV: Whether dream was reported and, if so, the detail 232. Study 2 233. Repeated measure design 234. Experimental analysis 235. 236. 237. Correlational analysis 238. 239. Before the research 240. 241. 242. 243. Study 3 244. Natural experiment (conducted in a laboratory 245. IV: eye movement type (X manipulated) 246. 247. 248. 249. 250. DV: report of dream content 251. Procedure 252. Requirement for participants 253. 254. 255. 256. 257. EEG ran continuously through the night 258. Researcher decided when participants should wake up (randomly from REM and nREM) 259. Woken by a door bell (loud enough to rouse them from any sleep stage 260. Dream recall 261. Indicate whether they had been dreaming 262. If so, described their dream content to the voice recorder Results {#results.Studysubsection} ======= 1. Study 1 263. The number of dream recall in REM sleep (152/80%) \> nREM sleep (11/7%) 264. Dream recall in first half (73) \> second half (67) for the 5 participants studied intensely 2. Study 2 265. Participants accurately estimate 5 mins (88%) \> 15 mins (78%) \> guess rate (50%) 266. DN estimates 5 mins (80%) \> 15 mins (50%) 267. Positive correlation between REM duration and number of words in the narrative 268. 30/50 mins REM sleep: dream narrative lengths not much longer than for 15 mins 269. Study 3 270. Vertical eye movement: 3 271. Throwing basketball at the net, shooting, looking at the net, look down to pick another ball 272. Standing at the bottom of a tall cliff operating a hoist (lifting machine) and looking up at the climbers at various levels then down at machine 273. Climbing up a series of ladders looking up and down to pick up another ball from the floor 274. Horizontal eye movements:1 275. Watching two people throwing tomatoes between each other 276. Little or no eye movements:10 277. Watch something in distance, or staring with their eyes fixed on a single objects 278. Driving car and starring at the road ahead, at a intersection, a speeding car suddenly appear to his left 279. Driving car and starring at the road ahead, a man standing to the left of the road and asked him as he drove by 280. Mix movement (both horizontal and vertical): 21 281. People fighting or talking to a group of other people Conclusion {#conclusion.Studysubsection} ========== 1. Study 1 282. Dreams probably (not certainly) occur only during REM sleep 283. Dreams reported when woken from nREM sleep are ones from previous REM episodes 284. Study 2 285. Dreams are not instantaneous events but rather experienced in \"real time\" 286. People can judge their duration in REM with accuracy 287. Study 3 288. Eye movements during REM sleep are not random, but are directly related to dream imagery Evaluation {#evaluation-1.Studysubsection} ========== 1. Reliability 289. \[+\] Standardization 290. Easy to replicate and test for reliability 291. Knowing about the procedure \... means that the study can be replicated exactly 292. The procedure can be replicated to see if the finding about \... is reliable 293. Fitted with the same equipment 294. Same electrodes near their eyes and scalp with the wires tied together behind their head 295. All slept in a bed in a quiet, dark room 296. All woken by a doorbell 297. All required to narrate their dream into a tape recorder 298. Data 299. \[+\] Quantitative data 300. Objective, no interpretation data about dreaming and REM sleep, easy to compare and analyze, researcher can know whether people dream more in REM/nREM by looking at the data 301. EEG 302. Dream estimation accuracy 303. The number of words in the dream narrative 304. Validity 305. \[+\] Control 306. More confident that differences in dream recall is caused by the stages of REM vs. nREM rather than... 307. Ate normally 308. No alcohol and coffee 309. Arrived just before bedime 310. Slept at a dark room 311. \[+\] Less effect from experimenter 312. More confident that differences in dream recall is caused by the stages of REM vs. nREM rather than\... 313. Avoid the possibility of the experimenter influencing a person\'s dream narrative through prompting or expectation 314. \[+\] Objective measure: EEG+EOG 315. \[-\] Some results discarded 316. 26/156 had to be discarded as they could not be understood from the tape 317. They might be genuine dream reports during non-REM sleep 318. \[-\] Individual differences 319. Different level of vocabulary or expression 320. Affect the correlation between the number of words in a dream narrative and the length of REM sleep 321. Ethics 322. \[+\] Informed consent 323. No deception: they know their dream/sleep were monitored 324. \[+\] Confidentiality 325. We only know the initials 326. \[+\] Privacy 327. Emotional space: they were not forced to tell their dream narratives 328. \[+\] Protection from physical harm 329. EEG do not pose any risk to people 330. \[-\] Protection from physical harm 331. Disrupt sleep pattern 332. Cannot concentrate next day 333. Generalization 334. \[-\] Generalising beyond the sample 335. Only 9 adult participants 336. 337. 7 males + 2 females 338. 339. \[-\] Generalising to everyday life 340. Lacks ecological validity 341. 342. 343. 344. Lack mundane realism 345. Issue and debate {#issue-and-debate-1.Studysubsection} ================ 1. Application 346. Useful for patients with sleep disorders (what) 347. Doctors can use EEG to detect the brain waves in REM and nREM sleep to see if these is any abnormalities (how) 348. Nature and nurture 349. Nature 350. Brain waves in REM and nREM are biological response we were born of 351. Nurture 352. Different dream content associated with vertical eye movement may due to different environmental influence/past experience 353. Individual vs. Situational explanation 354. Individual 355. Different success at estimating dream duration 356. Situational 357. In the laboratory may have caused some of the strange dreams Link to assumption {#link-to-assumption.Studysubsection} ================== 1. Behavior, cognitions and emotions can be explained in terms of the working of the brain and the effect of hormones, genetics and evolution 1. Similarities and differences between people can be understood in terms of biological factors and their interaction with other factors 2. Dreaming occurs during REM sleep, so similarities between people can be understood in terms of biological factors Holzel et al (Mindfulness and Brain Scan) -- New Study ====================================================== Psychology being investigated {#psychology-being-investigated-1.Studysubsection} ============================= 1. Mindfulness 358. History 359. Stemmed from Buddhist, almost all cultures and religions, adopted Buddhist's mindfulness and equanimity 360. Since 1990s, mindfulness meditation has been applied to multiple mental and physical conditions, and has received attention from psychological research 361. Definition: a state achieved through meditation that aims to increase awareness of the present-moment experience and enable a person to look at themselves in a compassionate, non-judgemental way 362. Applications: 363. Daily uses: could be a stress-reduction technique used to improve wellbeing 364. Clinical uses: incorporated into treatment programmes for people with conditions including anxiety, chronic pain and substance abuse 365. Types: 366. Body scanning: slowly becoming aware of sensations in each area of the body, in turn, gradually developing awareness of the whole body/mind 367. Mindful Yoga: gentle stretching, co-ordinated, slow movements and breathing with a focus on the moment-to-moment experience 368. Sitting meditation: developing awareness of the sensation of breathing and of sensory information (e.g. sight, smell, touch, taste) and emotions, gradually developing awareness of all aspects of consciousness, including our own presence in the world 369. Brain Localization (functionally distinct, physically discrete) 370. Specific brain structures are responsible for specific behaviours/cognitive processes (don't need to remember all of these area and function) 371. Core areas in the journal 372. Hippocampus (part of medial temporal lobe, under the cortex, and is part of the limbic system) 373. 374. Insula 375. 376. MRI (Magnetic resonance imaging) 377. A type of scan that creates a clear image of structure inside your body using a large magnet, radio waves, and a computer, and therefore it allows for detailed image of living brain to be made 378. (in the current research) Measuring changes in gray matter concentration 379. Grey matter concentration (GMC) = % of grey matter in relative to other tissues in a region 380. 381. 382. Using voxel-based morphometry (VBM) 383. Aim: compare the relative size of various brain structures between people 384. Transform brain scan from an individual to a standardized template, to find volumetric differences in small areas 385. Always pairs with structural MRI (T1-weighted) 386. Performing region of interests (ROI) analysis, and whole-brain analysis (vs. independent component analysis) 387. The five facets of mindfulness questionnaire (need to know its explanation and should be able to give an example to it) 388. Definition: an objective test on mindfulness and its impact on the vital aspect of life 389. Aspects 390. Observing 391. 392. Describe 393. 394. Acting with awareness 395. 396. Non-Judging of inner experience 397. 398. Non-reactivity to inner experience 399. Background {#background-1.Studysubsection} ========== 1. Previous research 400. Neural systems are modifiable network 401. Neural structure changes can occur in adults as results of training, e.g., + grey matter as effect of acquisition of abstract information (Dragnski et al., 2006), motor skills (Ilg et al., 2008). 402. Cross-sectional studies suggests the possibility of structural plasticity in experience meditator 403. Hippocampus 404. Structural change 405. 406. 407. Activation 408. 409. Insula 410. Structural change 411. 412. 413. Activation 414. Aim {#aim.Studysubsection} === 1. To investigate the potential long-term effect of a mindfulness-based stress reduction programme on brain grey matter concentration (GMC) Research Methods {#research-methods-2.Studysubsection} ================ 1. Longitudinal design 415. Both participants in MBSR groups and in control group were scanned twice 416. MBSR group: 2wks before (pre-) and after (post-) participation 417. Control group: scan twice, 2 months apart 2. Independent measure design 418. IV: whether the participants received MBSR or not 419. DVs 420. Changes in GMC in the regions of interests and in the whole brain analysis 421. Changes in the FFMQ scores 422. Experimental group 423. Who attended weekly MBSR sessions 424. Control group 425. Had problems with stress but did not receive MBSR program 426. Other techniques 427. Self-report 428. Brain scan 429. Samples 430. Sample demographics 431. 6 males and 10 females (mean age = 38) → MBSR group 432. 433. 11 males and 6 females (mean age = 39) → control group 434. Exclusion criteria (Characteristic) 435. 33 right-handed healthy adults 436. Physically and psychologically healthy 437. Not taking any regular medication 438. Limited meditation experience 439. No meditation classes in the past 6 months 440. No more than 4 classes in the past 5 years, or 10 classes in their lifetime 441. No contraindications for MRI scanning (i.e., metallic implants, claustrophobia) 442. Commitment to attend all 8 classes and perform the prescribed daily homework 443. Gave written consent and received a discounted MBSR course fee 444. Procedure 445. Before the MBSR sessions: data collection 446. FFMQ were taken 447. 448. MRI scans of the brain were taken 449. 450. 451. 452. During the eight-week programme 453. Experimental group 454. 455. 456. Homework 457. 458. Informal practice while engaged daily tasks 459. After the eight MBSR sessions: data analysis 460. FFMQ were taken again 461. 462. MRI scans of the brain were taken 463. 464. 465. 466. 467. 468. Other analysis 469. Report formal and informal mindfulness time over 8 weeks 470. 471. Result {#result.Studysubsection} ====== 1. Amount of mindfulness practice 472. MBSR group: 22.6 hours of MBSR exercises (27 mins per day) 473. There were no significant correlations between any of the individual exercises (e.g. body scanning and yoga, or yoga and meditation) 2. Improvements in mindfulness measurement scale score (FFMQ results) 474. MBSR\'s increases score on FFMQ \> control 475. MBSR participants showed significantly increases scores on FFMQ after the completion of the 8-week mindfulness on the following 3 subscales (in order from most to least significant value), Acting with awareness, observing, non-judging of inner experience 476. Control group does not show significant increases over the FFMQ scale 477. Grey matter concentration changes in ROI 478. Pre-study 479. No significant difference between MBSR and control group 480. Post-study point 481. MBSR 482. 483. 484. Control group 485. 486. There is no correlation between increases in grey matter concentration and the amount of the mindfulness homework completed in any of the brain area examined 487. Whole brain analysis 488. 4 clusters in the brains of participants in the MBSR group have significantly increase in GMC between pre- and post- time point Conclusion {#conclusion-1.Studysubsection} ========== 1. Structural changes (increased gray mater concentration) in the left hippocampus arise within an 8wk period of participation in a mindfulness course 489. Brain regions identified are involved in processes such as learning, memory, emotion regulation and perspective-taking, suggesting that these areas are central to the improvements in wellbeing observed in people who make mindfulness part of their daily lives Evaluation of the research {#evaluation-of-the-research.Studysubsection} ========================== 1. Reliability 490. \[+\] Standardization 491. Easy to replicate and test for reliability 492. The procedure can be replicated to see if the findings about \... are reliable 493. Fixed duration of sessions 494. Fixed total duration 495. Fixed number of exercise 496. \[-\] Standardization 497. Procedure cannot be replicated exactly, so differences in grey matter concentration post-intervention may not be reliable 498. Participants chose which exercises they wanted to do each day (where and for how long) 499. Some people may have completed the exercises alone in a quiet garden while others may have been surrounded by co-workers in a noisy office 500. Validity 501. \[+\] longitudinal design 502. Minimize participant variable 503. Were able to wait for the experiences of the intervention to affect brain plasticity in a measurable way 504. \[+\] Independent measure design 505. The use of the control group increased the study\'s validity, strengthening the conclusion that MBSR caused an increase in grey matter concentration in certain brain structures 506. MBSR caused an increase in grey matter concentration in certain brain structures rather than the passage of time 507. The use of control group 508. \[-\] EV 509. Hard to identify which factors led to their increased grey matter concentration relative to the control group 510. Potentially making new friends at their weekly sessions 511. Taking part in gentle exercise through yoga stretches 512. \[-\] Self-reported data 513. Lack of correlation between self reported mindfulness traits and gray matter concentration is also called into question 514. Answer question less carefully 515. Data 516. \[+\] Quantitative data 517. Objective and removes the need for interpretation, easy to compare and analyze data between control group and MBSR group 518. Collected by voxel-based morphometry 519. Analyzed by computer software 520. Questionnaire 521. Generalization 522. \[-\] Generalizing beyond the sample 523. Only 33 participants with aged 25-55 and had an average of 17.5 years of education 524. 525. Ethics 526. \[+\] Right to withdrawal 527. \[+\] Inform consent 528. \[+\] Protection from physical harm 529. \[+\] Protection from psychological harm 530. \[+\] Confidentiality Issue and debate {#issue-and-debate-2.Studysubsection} ================ 1. Application 531. Mindfulness in schools and workplaces (what) 532. 45 minutes group class every week to help students learn to use MBSR as a technique to release stress (how) 533. Nature vs. Nurture 534. Nature 535. About the workings of the brain, and the development of new synapses (synaptogenesis) is controlled by our genes 536. Nurture 537. Experiences, such as attending a regular mindfulness class, can influence our biology/nature 538. 539. Individual vs. Situational 540. Individual 541. Personality types that engage in the programme more or less successfully 542. Situational 543. MBSR Program did affect brain grey matter density compared to the control group Link to assumptions {#link-to-assumptions.Studysubsection} =================== 1. Changes in brain structure following mindfulness training show how similarities and differences between people can be understood in terms of biological factors and their interaction with other factors Hasset et al. -- New Study ========================== Psychology being investigated {#psychology-being-investigated-2.Studysubsection} ============================= 1. Sex differences 544. Males and females differ that are caused directly by sex, and include both physical and behavioral differences 545. Socialization 546. The way we are molded by society into adults who \"fit in\" 547. Gender stereotype vs. gender differences 548. The role of hormones: communicate within body 549. Testosterone 550. Muscle growth, aggression, libido, and the production of red blood cells 551. Oestrogen 552. Female reproductive cycle and the modulation of emotional behaviours Background {#background-2.Studysubsection} ========== 1. Congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH) 553. Definition: an inherited condition where the foetus (unborn child) is exposed to higher than usual levels of prenatal androgens (male sex hormones) 554. eg. girls with CAH show a preference for stereotypically male toys in comparison with their unaffected sisters 555. 556. Herman et al. (2003) 557. Female vervet monkeys exposed to prenatal androgens participated in more rough-and-tumble play than untreated controls (Goy et al., 1988) 558. Alexander and Hines (2002) 559. Unlike boys, male vervets spent comparable percentages of time with both masculine and feminine toys, showing no gendered toy preference 560. Unlike girls, female vervets spent a significantly greater proportion of time with feminine than with masculine toys 561. 562. Research gap 563. Thus although there are substantial concordances between human and nonhuman primate gendered social behavior, nonhuman primate data leave unresolved the relative concordance between human and non-human primate gendered toy preferences Aim {#aim-1.Studysubsection} === 1. To investigate whether sex differences in toy preferences of rhesus monkey were the same as those in the toy preference of children 564. To investigate sex differences in toy preferences of rhesus monkeys 565. To see if socialisation processes, or biological mechanisms affect sex-stereotypical toy choice in rhesus monkeys 566. To see if there are sex differences in toy choice of rhesus monkeys compared to human children Research methods {#research-methods-3.Studysubsection} ================ 1. Design 567. Field experiment 568. Normal, outdoors housing area 569. Free to interact with toys or not 570. Independent measure design 571. IV 572. 573. DV 574. 575. 576. Analysis using correlation 577. Look for relationship between individual monkeys\' rank within the social hierarchy and the frequency or duration of activities with each toy type 578. Material 579. The toys varied in size, shape and color and were selected according to what you could \'do\' with them rather than simply choosing traditionally \'male\' or \'female\' toys 580. Samples 581. Pool of 135 monkeys in Yerkes National Primate Research Center Field Station over 25 years 582. Excluded 583. 584. 585. 61 females and 21 males remained 586. Housing 587. Water was continuously available 588. Monkey chow twice daily 589. Supplemented once per day with fruits and vegetables 590. Conduced in accordance with NIH Guid for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals under protocol of the Yerkes National Primate Research Center 591. Approved by Emory\'s Institutional Animal care and Use Committee 592. Procedure 593. Data collection 594. 7, 25-minute observations were completed in the outdoor area 595. Before each observation, the observers positioned a pair of toys (one wheeled, one plush) in the outdoor area while the monkeys waited indoors, the positions were counterbalanced 596. After each trial the toys were removed and the video tape was analyzed by two observers working together to achieve a consensus 597. 598. 599. 600. 601. Data analysis 602. Overall average frequency and duration adding up the totals and dividing by the number of trials each monkey participated in 603. 14 male and 3 females excluded (fewer than five recorded behavior) 604. 11 males and 23 females included 605. Measuring the social rank 606. Using observation technique 607. Measuring the following behavior 608. 609. 610. Results {#results-1.Studysubsection} ======= 1. Frequency of interaction 611. Within-sex comparison 612. Males\' frequency of interaction for wheeled toys (9.77) \> plush toys (2.06) 613. Female monkeys show no consistent preference 614. 615. Between-sex comparison 616. Males (2.06) show significantly lower frequency of play with plush toys compared with females (7.97) 617. Males and females did not differ in their total interactions with wheeled toys 618. Duration of interactions 619. Within-sex comparison 620. Males\' duration of interaction with wheeled toys (4.76) \> plush toys (0.53) 621. Females\' duration of interaction was not significantly different between plush (1.49) toys and wheeled toys (1.27) 622. Between-sex comparison 623. Males and females did not differ significantly in the duration of interaction with wheeled or with plush 624. Analysis of age 625. For juvenile, subadult, adult and old, no differences were found in frequency & duration of interaction by age for plush & wheeled toy 626. Magnitude of preference 627. Definition 628. how much males preferred the \'masculine\' (wheeled) toy and how much females preferred the \"feminine\' (plush) toy 629. Calculation 630. Males: total frequency/duration wheeled - total frequency/duration plush 631. Female: total frequency/duration plush - total frequency/duration wheeled 632. Results 633. Males\' preference for wheeled (masculine) \> females\' preference for plush (feminine） 634. Males\' preference \> females\' in both frequency & duration 635. Social rank and toy preference 636. Both sex 637. Rank & frequency -\> positive correlated for wheeled and plush 638. Females 639. Rank & duration -\> positive correlated for plush toys but not for wheeled toys 640. Rank & frequency -\> positive correlated for wheeled & plush 641. Males 642. Rank & duration/frequency -\> not significant correlated for plush and wheeled 643. However, the social rank accounts for little (accounts for \~10%-30%) if any of the variance in interactions with toys. Thus, it is unlikely that the social rank determines the sex differences in toy preference 644. Monkey and Children 645. Both rhesus monkeys and human children showed gender differences 646. Males preferring masculine toys and females preferring feminine toys 647. Preference was much more marked with males than for females Conclusion {#conclusion-2.Studysubsection} ========== 1. Sex-typed toy preferences in humans may result from biological sex differences, as their observations suggest that rhesus monkeys show similar preferences as their observations suggest that rhesus monkeys show similar preferences Evaluation {#evaluation-2.Studysubsection} ========== 648. Reliability 649. \[+\] inter-observer reliability 650. Well-operationalized behavioral checklist 651. 652. \[-\] unexpected event 653. 654. 655. Validity 656. \[+\] 7 observational trials 657. This increased the validity of the conclusion that males were drawn to wheeled toys in general as opposed to one specific wheeled toy that might have been a colour or size that the monkeys particularly liked 658. 659. 660. 661. 662. \[+\] The use of video cameras 663. monkeys may have played less if they were stressed by the humans coming into the enclosure or they may have played more in the hope of receiving a reward, suggesting that the cameras increased the validity of the data recorded 664. The monkeys were not have been affected by cameras, whereas the presence of a human observer might have affected the spontaneity of their interactions/play 665. \[-\] Researcher bias 666. Increased subjectivity, meaning that different observers who did not know the monkeys may have reached different conclusions 667. 668. 669. Generalisability 670. \[-\] Generalising beyond the sample 671. Lack of adult males 672. 673. \[-\] Generalising to everyday life 674. Low ecological validity 675. 676. 677. Data 678. \[+\] Quantitative data 679. Only need to calculate the average time spent and compare the males with the females rather than subjective interpretation 680. 681. 682. Ethics 683. \[+\] Approved by Emory University Ethical committee on animal care and use 684. \[+\] Housing 685. Ethically housed in family group in large enclosures 686. Assess to both a temperature-controlled indoor area + outdoor area regular and appropriate food 687. Twice daily monkey feed 688. Daily fruit and vegetables 689. Constant access to water 690. \[+\] Pain and distress 691. Protection from psychological distress or physical pain 692. Observation using cameras 693. The level of interactions with toys is appropriate Issues and debates {#issues-and-debates.Studysubsection} ================== 1. Application 694. Choosing toys for children (what) 695. For parents to choose vehicles with expressive faces if they wish to develop empathy skills in boys through (how) 696. Nature vs. Nurture 697. Nurture 698. Preferences were affected by social rank 699. Positive correlation between time spent interacting with both plush and wheeled toys 700. Nature 701. male monkeys showed a preference for wheeled toys over plush toys, whereas females showed no clear preference 702. Individual vs. Situational 703. Individual 704. Some monkeys showed too few choices of and interactions with any of the toys 705. Some monkeys were not interested in toys or play that involved the toys 706. Situational 707. The situation the monkeys found themselves in encouraged toy choice and interactions with the toys 708. Use of animals 709. Reduce confounding variables 710. Rank 711. little effect on the sex differences in toy preference 712. Differences between monkeys and children 713. The results of children\'s study are from Berenbaum and Hines (1992) 714. Different toys 715. Masculine and feminine toys offered to monkeys were chosen for their object properties rather than gender-stereotyped toys for children 716. Different measure 717. Children assessed in a different study using different toys and only measuring duration of play not frequency 718. The most significant comparison was between frequency for monkeys and duration for the children, rather than duration for both 719. Different methodological 720. Children: tested each participant individually 721. Monkeys: observed in groups Links to assumptions {#links-to-assumptions.Studysubsection} ==================== 1. Sex differences in toy preferences were seen in monkeys without socialisation to these toys, so this behaviour can be explained in terms of the effect of genetic and evolutionary differences between the sexes Cognitive approach {#cognitive-approach.Approach} ================== Definition ========== 1. Cognitive approach is about the way how we process information 2. Cognitive approach is about the way how our memory works 3. We processes information in the same way: input-process-out 4. We think/process like a computer 722. Behaviors and emotions can be explained in terms of the role of thinking process like attention, memory and language 723. Examples 724. People were able to process information from a telephone message without focusing on it (Andrade et al.,) 725. Participants could recall more names when they were doodling so they could selectively attend (Andrade et al.,) Pozzulo et al., -- New Study ============================ Psychology being investigated {#psychology-being-investigated-3.Studysubsection} ============================= 1. False memory 726. A piece of stored information an individual believes to be an accurate memory but which is the consequence of later additional and untrue information 6. Eyewitness testimony 727. Information provided by an individual or group based on what they can recall from observing an incident that is usually criminal in nature 728. Line-up 729. The witness is asked to identify the perpetrator of the crime from a selection of individual presented to them 730. False positive response 731. Giving an affirmative (positive) but incorrect answer to a question 732. False positive responses: incorrectly choosing a foil 733. False negative responses: incorrectly state that the suspect is absent Background {#background-3.Studysubsection} ========== 1. Pozzulo et al. 734. Cognitive effect (post-event information & the way questions are asked) can be responsible for errors in decision-making by children 735. Pozzulo & Lindsay (1997) 736. Children were less likely than adult to say \'I don\'t know\' in response to a question even when they knew this answer is possible 737. Pozzulo & Lindsay (1998) 738. When the culprit is not among the people in line-up, children are more likely than adults to identify an innocent person 739. False positive responses Aims {#aims-1.Studysubsection} ==== 1. To investigate the role of social and cognitive factors in children\' s identification of target faces in line-ups. 740. Line-up tasks (2 components) 741. Target present task: Identification\' of a suspect, the culprit is among the faces presented 742. Target absent task: Correctly reject faces when the culprit is not presented 743. How social factors and cognitive factors affect children's line-up identification accuracy 744. Prediction 745. 控制familiarity level的变化 \>\> 说明cognitive-demand 高的时候，小朋友会表现的差一点 746. 控制task变化 \>\> 说明在cognitive demand同样低的情况下，小朋友false positive只能是因为social factor Research methods {#research-methods-4.Studysubsection} ================ 1. Sample 747. Children 748. n=59 749. Aged from 4-7 years (mean age: 4.98 years) 750. Recruited from kindergarten classes in three private schools in Eastern Ontario, Canada 751. 21 females and 38 males 752. Opportunity sampling: investigators recruiting the participant through the targeted institution, and they may be recommended by the school tutor 753. Adults 754. Age range 17-30 (mean age: 20.54 years) 755. Recruited from the Introductory Psychology Participant Pool in an Eastern Ontario university 756. 36 females and 17 males 757. Opportunity sampling: investigators recruiting the participant through the targeted institution, and they may be recommended by the school tutor 758. Research method 759. IV 760. Age: Young children vs. Adult 761. Line-up type: identification (target present) vs. Rejection (target absent line-up) 762. Level of cognitive demand: cartoon (familiar -\> low cognitive demand) vs. human (unfamiliar -\> high cognitive demand) 763. DV 764. Target-present line-up task 765. 766. 767. 768. Target-absent line-up task 769. 770. 771. Research design 772. Independent measure design 773. Comparison between the young children and the adults 774. Repeated measure design 775. All participants took part in the identification of human faces and cartoons plus identifying from target-present and target-absent line-ups - For independent measure design: it is because the study compared the line-up identification accuracy between children and adults - For repeated measures design: it is because all the participant took part in identification of human faces and cartoon faces in task-present/absent line-up tasks 776. Procedure - Children 777. Demographic and Cartoon watching form 778. Demographic and Cartoon Watching form 779. The parent or guardian of each child was given a consent form and the Demographic and Cartoon Watching form 780. 781. 782. Only children with consent were invited 783. Before the experiment 784. Engaged the children in craft activities before the actual study started 785. All participants were monitored for any signs of stress, fatigue, and anxiety as a result of being in the study 786. The children were told that they would be watching some brief video clips 787. They need to pay attention because afterwards they would be asked some questions about it and shown some pictures 788. Ethic issues 789. Inform consent: parent or guardian of each child were given and signed a consent form 790. Free from psychological harm: children were monitored for fatigue, anxiety, and stress; experimenter worked with children to make some crafts 791. During the experiment 792. Experimenter played the first video clip (randomly chosen + total of 4), counterbalanced target/replacement position 793. After the watching the video, the children were asked following question -- "filler task" 794. 795. 796. 797. After recording the children\'s response, the experimenter displayed line-up on laptop to children 798. Target, foils, and silhouette presented in the target-absent/present tasks 799. The same procedure was repeated tor the other 3 video clips 800. Material used in line-up tasks：Human face vs. Foil 801. Foils validation (inter - rater reliability) 802. 803. 804. 805. 806. 807. 808. - Adults 809. Before the experiment 810. The adults were told that the study was investigating memory and that they would be watching some brief video dips 811. Pay attention to each video clip because afterwards they would be asked some questions about it and shown some pictures 812. During the experiment 813. After the first video, each adult was given a sheet asking the same free recall questions as the children were asked 814. Reminder is the same as children, they record line-up choice on a matching sheet 815. Demographic and cartoon watching form 816. 2. Controls 817. Using photo in black and white 818. Reduced the possibility that the bright and vibrant color would be the focus of recognition rather than deification 819. Professional - causal clothing worn (on 24 test) 820. What 821. 822. 823. 824. 825. Why (on 24 test) 826. 827. Using closely cropped photo, incl. their faces, neck and the tops of their shoulder 828. 829. 830. 831. Muted videos 832. 833. 834. Results {#results-2.Studysubsection} ======= 1. Target-present line-ups 835. Both children and adults were significantly more accurate identifying cartoon faces compared to human faces 836. Children: cartoon faces (99%) \> human faces (23%) 837. Adults: cartoon faces (95%) \> human faces (66%) 838. 839. 840. Children's correct identification rate for human face(23%)\