Children's identification of graphic symbols representing four basic emotions: Comparison of Afrikaans-speaking and Sepedi-speaking children

DeKlerk, Hester M.; Dada, Shakila; Alant, Erna

doi:10.1016/j.jcomdis.2014.05.006

Cited by 13 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similar problems arise when using apparently natural graphic symbols to represent concepts (29) or pictorial designs to represent spatial arrangements (15,30,31). Indeed, if we turn to a literature where miscommunicating with symbols has life or death consequences (studies of safety, emergency, and traffic signs), a recurring finding is that there are few (if any) universally meaningful symbols and that correct interpretation usually depends on extended periods of learning and training (32,33).…”

Section: Beyond the Likert Formatmentioning

confidence: 95%

Learning from failures of protocol in cross-cultural research

Hruschka

Munira

Jesmin

et al. 2018

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The many tools that social and behavioral scientists use to gather data from their fellow humans have, in most cases, been honed on a rarefied subset of humanity: highly educated participants with unique capacities, experiences, motivations, and social expectations. Through this honing process, researchers have developed protocols that extract information from these participants with great efficiency. However, as researchers reach out to broader populations, it is unclear whether these highly refined protocols are robust to cultural differences in skills, motivations, and expected modes of social interaction. In this paper, we illustrate the kinds of mismatches that can arise when using these highly refined protocols with nontypical populations by describing our experience translating an apparently simple social discounting protocol to work in rural Bangladesh. Multiple rounds of piloting and revision revealed a number of tacit assumptions about how participants should perceive, understand, and respond to key elements of the protocol. These included facility with numbers, letters, abstract number lines, and 2D geometric shapes, and the treatment of decisions as a series of isolated events. Through onthe-ground observation and a collaborative refinement process, we developed a protocol that worked both in Bangladesh and among US college students. More systematic study of the process of adapting common protocols to new contexts will provide valuable information about the range of skills, motivations, and modes of interaction that participants bring to studies as we develop a more diverse and inclusive social and behavioral science. generalizability | diversity | cross-cultural | social discounting | Bangladesh I n 1932, the psychologist Rensis Likert (1) published his dissertation on a novel method for measuring attitudes. After giving university students printed statements about race relations, Likert asked them to check one of five options (strongly approve, approve, undecided, disapprove, and strongly disapprove) indicating how much they endorsed each of these statements. Likert then assigned numbers to these levels of approval and took an average across all statements. The simplicity of both the response format and construction of the scale soon spurred researchers to adopt elements of the technique to assess not only attitudes (Likert's original interest) but also subjective judgments along many dimensions, including likelihood, desirability, difficulty, and happiness (2). Today, after decades of testing and refinement on generations of participants, Likert's simple format has become a reliable mainstay of social and behavioral research.Given its ubiquity in the social and behavioral sciences, one might guess that a five-or seven-item Likert format is a natural way of asking humans about their subjective judgments. However, in the rare cases when researchers have described their experience using Likert items outside of formally educated populations, they have been met with mixed success (3,4). It turns out tha...

show abstract

Section: Beyond the Likert Formatmentioning

confidence: 95%

Learning from failures of protocol in cross-cultural research

Hruschka

Munira

Jesmin

et al. 2018

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Despite the benefits of visual aids for health literacy, Park and Zuniga, highlighted that both culture and literacy levels can impact the guessability of images (how visual aids are understood) [22,[28][29][30]. For instance, different understanding of pictures was evident between cultural groups [31][32][33][34], and although visual aids may have a positive effect on persons with low-literacy [22,35,36], it was cautioned that they could over-simplify or distort information.…”

Section: A Scoping Review On the Use Of Visual Aids In Health Education Materials For Persons With Low-literacy Levels 1 Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A scoping review of the use of visual aids in health education materials for persons with low-literacy levels

Mbanda

Dada

Bastable

et al. 2021

Patient Education and Counseling

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Cross-cultural studies show that especially emotions of happiness, sadness, surprise, disgust, anger, and fear are universally recognized emotions but there are always some variations in their expression and recognition that are dependent on individual's culture which they grow in (Ekman et al, 1987;Shioiri et al, 1999). The recognition of emotion across cultures is similar, while the way in which emotions might be represented or labeled appears to be more culture-specific (DeKlerk, Dada & Alant, 2014). In that matter, effects of culture, thus, cross-cultural differences concerning the emotional expressions and symptoms were emphasized in some studies (Lehti, Johansson, Bengs, Danielsson, Hammarstrom, 2010).…”

Section: Emotional Expressivitymentioning

confidence: 99%