The Effect of Visual Appearance on the Performance of Continuous Sliders and Visual Analogue Scales

Matejka, Justin; Glueck, Michael; Grossman, Tovi; Fitzmaurice, George

doi:10.1145/2858036.2858063

Cited by 91 publications

(54 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The original BFI contains 44 statements ("I see myself as someone who…") that participants rate on a 5-point scale. In the present study all items were rated using 0-100 slider scales with nominal descriptors at 0 ("Strongly Disagree"), 50 ("Neutral"), and 100 ("Strongly Agree") (Matejka, Glueck, Grossman, & Fitzmaurice, 2016). This alteration did not negatively impact reliability (Extraversion α = 0.87, Agreeableness α = 0.77, Conscientiousness α =0.82, Neuroticism α = 0.83, Openness α = 0.71).…”

Section: Dispositional Personalitymentioning

confidence: 91%

Personalizing Practice using Preferences for Meditation Anchor Modality

Anderson¹,

Farb²

2017

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many new people are engaging contemplative practices and Mindfulness-Based Interventions (MBIs) have become quite popular. While MBIs positively impact well-being, drop-out and lack of practice-maintenance plagues these interventions, which use the breath to anchor attention. No study had yet compared preferences for practices using anchors from different sensory modalities (e.g. auditory, visual) thus the present study examined such individual differences, sharing resources on the OSF (osf.io/hcnz2/). Participants engaged 10-min practices within three modalities (somatosensory, auditory, visual) and post-practice preferences were modelled. Preference differences did exist: 49% preferred the breath, 30% the auditory-phrase, and 21% the visual-image. Pre-practice motivation and anchor-modality were primary predictors and cardiac responses also influenced preference. Preferences were updated through experience and over half of participants left the experiment preferring a different anchor than when entering. Tangible next-steps are discussed, including integrating additional anchor modalities into existing interventions by offering brief practices with a variety of anchors. Suggestions are made for increasing post-training contact using email-automation to answer central practice-maintenance questions, including whether and which contemplative benefits are predicated on continued practice.

show abstract

Section: Dispositional Personalitymentioning

confidence: 91%

Personalizing Practice using Preferences for Meditation Anchor Modality

Anderson¹,

Farb²

2017

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Following each experimental block, participants were asked to write down any comments they had about their perception of the illusion (open feedback). Phenomenological aspects of the illusion were then systematically assessed with a questionnaire adapted from the classical RHI questionnaire (Botvinick and Cohen, 1998;Longo et al, 2008) using a banded visual analogue scale (Matejka et al, 2016). Questions one through six were scored positively from 0 to 10, whereas questions seven through ten pertain to the feeling of disownership and were therefore reverse-coded for the analysis (0 -> 10, 1 ->9, etc.).…”

Section: Rehi Questionnairementioning

confidence: 99%

Experimentally induced limb-disownership in mixed reality

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The seemingly stable construct of our bodily self depends on the continued, successful integration of multisensory feedback about our body, rather than its purely physical composition. Accordingly, pathological disruption of such neural processing is linked to striking alterations of the bodily self, ranging from limb misidentification to disownership, and even the desire to amputate a healthy limb. While previous embodiment research has relied on experimental setups using supernumerary limbs in variants of the Rubber Hand Illusion, we here used Mixed Reality to directly manipulate the feeling of ownership for one's own, biological limb. Using a Head-Mounted Display, participants received visual feedback about their own arm, from an embodied first-person perspective. In a series of three studies, in independent cohorts, we altered embodiment by providing visuotactile feedback that could be synchronous (control condition) or asynchronous (400ms delay, Real Hand Illusion). During the illusion, participants reported a significant decrease in ownership of their own limb, along with a lowered sense of agency. Supporting the right-parietal body network, we found an increased illusion strength for the left upper limb as well as a modulation of the feeling of ownership during anodal transcranial direct current stimulation. Extending previous research, these findings demonstrate that a controlled, visuotactile conflict about one's own limb can be used to directly and systematically modulate ownershipwithout a proxy. This not only corroborates the malleability of body representation but questions its permanence. These findings warrant further exploration of combined VR and neuromodulation therapies for disorders of the bodily self.

show abstract

“…For most of these issues there is only a budding body of research to draw upon. Matejka, et al (2016) is to our knowledge the only in-depth study testing the effect of the number of ticks (on a slide line) on self-report precision and speed. This study indicated that with regard to precision that 11 ticks is superior to five.…”

Section: New Issues With Survey Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

The How of Survey Self-report: VAS-Likert-Slide-Swipe... Same difference?

Fryer

2020

FLR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Self-report is a fundamental research tool for the social sciences. Despite quantitative surveys being the workhorses of the self-report stable, few researchers question their format-often blindly using some form of Labelled Categorical Scale (Likert-type). This study presents a brief review of the current literature examining the efficacy of survey formats, addressing longstanding paper-based concerns and more recent issues raised by computer-and mobile-based surveys. An experiment comparing four survey formats on touch-based devices was conducted. Differences in means, predictive validity, time to complete and centrality were compared. A range of preliminary findings emphasise the similarities and striking differences between these self-report formats. Key conclusions include: A) that the two continuous interfaces (Slide & Swipe) yielded the most robust data for predictive modelling; B) that future research with touch self-report interfaces can set aside the VAS format; C) that researchers seeking to improve on Likert-type formats need to focus on user interfaces that are quick/simple to use. Implications and future directions for research in this area are discussed.

show abstract

The Effect of Visual Appearance on the Performance of Continuous Sliders and Visual Analogue Scales

Cited by 91 publications

References 30 publications

Personalizing Practice using Preferences for Meditation Anchor Modality

Personalizing Practice using Preferences for Meditation Anchor Modality

Experimentally induced limb-disownership in mixed reality

The How of Survey Self-report: VAS-Likert-Slide-Swipe... Same difference?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About