MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2566414358

Measuring Emotional Responses to Interaction: Evaluation of Sliders and Physiological Reactions

2011· dissertation· en· W2566414358 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2011
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicColor perception and design
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaKeio University
KeywordsPsychologyCognitive psychologyHuman–computer interactionComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent work has proposed sliders as a useful way to measure self-reported emotion continuously. My dissertation extends this work to ask: what are relevant properties of affective self-report on sliders and variations? How reliable are affective self-reports? How do they relate to physiological data? What are individual and cultural differences? How can this method be applied to ehealth? Three emotion self-report tools (one-slider, two-slider, a touchscreen) were developed and evaluated in four experiments. The first experiment was within-subjects. Participants viewed short videos, with four self-report conditions (including no reporting) and physiological capture (heart rate variability and skin conductance). In a re-rating task, the sliders models were found to be more reliable than the touchscreen (Lottridge & Chignell, 2009a). The second and third experiments were between-subjects, and examined individual and cultural differences. Canadian and Japanese participants watched a nature video, while rating emotions and answering questions. Analyses were carried out within and across the datasets. Larger operation span displayed a minor benefit. Valence and arousal ratings were not strongly related to skin conductance. The Japanese performed on par with Canadians but reported worse performance. Based on the results, the recommendation was made that a single slider be used to rate valence, that arousal be estimated with skin conductance, and that slider psychometrics be used to assess cognitive load over time. In the fourth experiment, diabetic participants watched Diabetes-related videos. They clustered into usage patterns: some moved the slider very little during videos and more afterward, some hardly moved the slider, and some used it as expected. Two novel metrics facilitated these analyses: Emotional Bandwidth, an application of information entropy that characterizes the granularity of the self reports (Lottridge & Chignell, 2009b) and Emotional Majority Agreement, the amount of agreement relative to a sample’s self-reports (Lottridge & Chignell, 2009c). In summary, this dissertation contributes a method of measuring emotion through sliders and skin conductance that has been evaluated in a number of experimental studies. It contributes the empirical results, design recommendations, and two novel metrics of emotional response. Limitations and implications for future research and practice are also discussed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.945
Threshold uncertainty score0.988

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.402
GPT teacher head0.486
Teacher spread0.084 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it