2006
DOI: 10.1007/s11031-006-9047-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Induction of Mood via the WWW

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
32
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
2

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 35 publications
(35 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
2
32
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Another experiment found that anxiety (which falls under negative affect) can significantly disrupt visuospatial working memory, leaving verbal working memory intact [45]. Our study is partially based on these prior findings, and apply the same text-based affective priming techniques as presented by Goeritz and Verheyen [21,48].…”
Section: Affect and Cognitionmentioning
confidence: 71%
“…Another experiment found that anxiety (which falls under negative affect) can significantly disrupt visuospatial working memory, leaving verbal working memory intact [45]. Our study is partially based on these prior findings, and apply the same text-based affective priming techniques as presented by Goeritz and Verheyen [21,48].…”
Section: Affect and Cognitionmentioning
confidence: 71%
“…The effect sizes of the mood inductions in this experiment can also be compared to Göritz (2007), who used some of the texts also used in this study but on another sample. The positive induction in Göritz (2007, Study 4) used the same text that was used in POS3, albeit accompanied by two cartoons featuring children.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Distress in NEG2 was comparable to the control groups. However, if more shocking material for a negative mood induction is to be used (e.g., explicit pictures or videos), participants should be warned beforehand and given the opportunity to quit the study or skip this part of the study (Göritz, 2007).…”
Section: Ethicsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, we argue that participants should be given a method of indicating that their previous responses may not be used, if they withdraw because new information makes them find the study objectionable (e.g., explanation of deception) or because they are uncomfortable providing certain information to the researchers (e.g., confidential or emotionally sensitive information). The data withdrawal option should be presented after the new information or emotionally sensitive questions, as was done by Göritz (2006), or as part of the debriefing, as has been suggested by the University of New Hampshire Institutional Review Board for the Protection of Human Subjects in Research (2005).…”
Section: Security Of Test Materialsmentioning
confidence: 99%