<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Applied Psychology Working Papers</title>
<copyright>Copyright (c) 2013 Bryant University All rights reserved.</copyright>
<link>http://digitalcommons.bryant.edu/apwork</link>
<description>Recent documents in Applied Psychology Working Papers</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 Mar 2013 16:14:46 PDT</lastBuildDate>
<ttl>3600</ttl>








<item>
<title>Infant Object Mastery in the Home: A Robust Phenomenon</title>
<link>http://digitalcommons.bryant.edu/apwork/4</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://digitalcommons.bryant.edu/apwork/4</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 21 Mar 2006 10:07:40 PST</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>In this study, it was hypothesized that experimentally introduced noise would disrupt infant object mastery performance in the home environment. Twenty-four 12-month-old infants performed under control and experimental test conditions on alternating home visits. A tape-recording of talk radio conversations was introduced during the experimental test visit. Each videotaped visit included a test session with 6 short object mastery trials. The hypothesis was not supported. The implications of the findings are addressed.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>Nanci Weinberger</author>


</item>






<item>
<title>Are Bodies Special?</title>
<link>http://digitalcommons.bryant.edu/apwork/3</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://digitalcommons.bryant.edu/apwork/3</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 21 Mar 2006 08:18:37 PST</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>How do we think about the space of bodies? This was addressed in body-part verification tasks exploring several accounts of mental representations of bodies. An imagery account predicts faster times to larger parts (e. g., back < hand). A part distinctiveness account predicts faster times to more discontinuous parts (e. g., arm < chest). A part significance account predicts faster times to parts that are perceptually distinct and functionally important (head < back). Because distinctiveness and significance are correlated, these accounts are more difficult to distinguish. Both name-body and body-body comparisons were investigated in four experiments. In all, larger parts were verified slower than smaller ones, eliminating the imagery account. Despite the similarity between distinctiveness and significance, the data suggest that when comparisons are perceptual (body-body), part distinctiveness is the best predictor, and when explicit or implicit naming is involved, part significance is the best predictor. Naming seems to activate functional aspects of bodies.</p>
<p>Request a copy of the paper from the author: Julie Bauer Morrison</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>Julie Bauer Morrison et al.</author>


</item>






<item>
<title>How Was Your Session at the Writing Center? Pre- and Post- Grade Evaluations </title>
<link>http://digitalcommons.bryant.edu/apwork/2</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://digitalcommons.bryant.edu/apwork/2</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 21 Mar 2006 08:09:11 PST</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>Do students reinterpret their tutoring experiences after receiving grades on tutored assignments? This study investigated students' perceptions of the efficacy of consultations at a college Writing Center(WC) before and after the assignment was graded. 53 students in apsychology course were individually tutored by WC consultants, immediately after which the students evaluated the experience using Likert scales. Approximately one week after receiving their grade and three weeks after making the initial evaluation, students completed a detailed evaluation of their experience. Overall, ratings on the primary "satisfaction with experience" scale were lower after grades had been received than before. However, students receiving As lowered their ratings less than those receiving Bs, Cs, and Ds. This finding may be explained by the self-serving bias in which the A students attributed their success after the fact less to the WC and more to their own ability, hence the slight lowering of their ratings, and the B, C, and D students blamed the WC for their performance, and lowered their ratings more substantially. Additionally, students who received lower grades reported using less of the advice offered by the WC and felt that the WC could have done more to help them. At the same time, these students reported that they could have worked harder on their papers, suggesting they may be coping with an unsatisfactory grade by believing they had the ability to receive a high grade if only they had worked harder and not been hindered by the WC. Additional findings and implications for students, professors, and writing centers are discussed.</p>
<p>Request a copy of the paper from the author: Julie Bauer Morrison</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>Julie Bauer Morrison et al.</author>


</item>






<item>
<title>Animation: Can It Facilitate?</title>
<link>http://digitalcommons.bryant.edu/apwork/1</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://digitalcommons.bryant.edu/apwork/1</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 21 Mar 2006 07:05:11 PST</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>Graphics have been used since ancient times to portray things that are inherently spatiovisual, like maps and building plans. More recent, graphics have been used to portray things that are metaphorically spatiovisual, like graphs and organizational charts. The assumption is that graphics can facilitate comphrehension, learning, memory, communication, and inference. Assumptions aside, research on static graphics has shown that only carefully designed and appropriate graphics prove to be beneficial for conveying complex systems. Effective graphics conform to the Congruence Principle according to which the content and format of the graphic should correspond to the content and format of the concepts to be conveyed. From this, it follows that animated graphics should be affactive in porttraying change over time. Yest the research on the efficacy of animated over static graphics is not encouraging. In cases where animated graphics seem superior to static ones, scrutiny reveals lack of equivalence between animated and static graphics in content or procedures; the animated graphics convey more information or involve interactivity. Animations of events may be innefective because animations violate the second principle of good graphics, the Apprehension Principle, according to which graphics should be accurately perceived and appropriately conceived. Animations are often too complex or too fast to be accurately perceived. Moreover, many countinuous events are conceived as sequences of discrete steps. Judicious use of interactivity may overcome both these disadvantages. Animations may be more effective that comparable static graphics in situations other that conveying complex systems, for example, for real time reorientations in time and space.</p>
<p>Request a copy of the paper from the author:Julie Bauer Morrison</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>Julie Bauer Morrison</author>


</item>





</channel>
</rss>
