The present research examined the role of personality factors and paratextual information about the reliability of a story on its persuasiveness. Study 1 (N = 135) was focused on recipients' explicit expectations about the trustworthiness/usefulness and the immersiveness/entertainment value of stories introduced as nonfiction, fiction, or fake. Study 2 (experimental, N = 186) demonstrated that a story was persuasive in all three paratext conditions (nonfiction, fiction, or fake versus belief-unrelated control story) and that its influence increased with the recipients' need for affect. Participants' need for cognition increased the difference in persuasiveness of a nonfictional versus a fake story. Additional mediation analyses suggest that fiction is more persuasive than fake because readers of fiction get more deeply transported into the story world.
This paper explores disciplinary patterns of assessment and feedback, using data from the Transforming the Experience of Students through Assessment project. Its central research question concerns the effect of disciplinary assessment patterns on student learning. Audit data from 18 degree programmes at 8 UK universities showed variations in assessment patterns across three disciplinary fields: Humanities, Professional and Science courses. There were variations in assessment demands; in the quantity of feedback and in the proportion of examinations. Statistical analysis of Assessment Experience Questionnaire data (n = 762) explored whether these differences influenced students' perceptions of learning across the disciplines. Findings showed that there were no significant differences in students' perceptions of learning from examinations. Humanities students evaluated the appropriateness of their assessment lower than other discipline groups; professional students were less clear about goals and standards. The researchers propose explanations for these findings and suggest avenues for further research.
IntroductionDepressive disorders are very common diseases entailing a great burden on affected people. However, comprehensive information on long-term disease course in patients with severe depression is lacking so far. The objectives of the DELTA study are to examine long-term outcomes and their predicting factors, to assess clinical response of antidepressant pharmacotherapy by applying therapeutic drug monitoring, to identify predictors of therapeutic non-response, to describe the long-term healthcare utilisation and to investigate the role of biomarkers in disease course.Methods and analysisA cohort study including all adult hospitalised cases (age range 18 to 75 years) of severe major depression who are admitted to the Bezirkskrankenhaus Augsburg is established. It is planned to include 300 patients. During the hospital stay, information is gathered through personal interview, self-administered questionnaires, cognitive tests and chart review. Furthermore, biomaterials are collected. After hospital discharge, patients are repeatedly re-examined over time (3, 6, 12, 24 and 36 months) to collect information about mortality, relapse, depression severity, health-related quality of life (HRQOL), perceived stigma, cognitive functions, diet, physical activity, treatment and healthcare utilisation. Follow-up blood samples are collected to determine therapeutic drug levels. The primary study aim is to investigate long-term therapeutic response, survival, relapse, HRQOL and cognitive functions. Survival time and time to relapse or re-hospitalisation will be analysed using Cox regression models. Changes of HRQOL, depressive symptoms and cognitive functions over time will be examined using generalised linear regression models for repeated measures or mixed models. Correlates of the disease course will be modelled using suitable generalised linear, mixed, estimating equation and growth curve models.Ethics and disseminationThe study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (date of approval: 23 October 2017, reference number: 17–625). Study results will be presented at scientific conferences and published in peer-reviewed scientific journals.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.