Tessa Clarkson, The University of Queensland
@tessaclarkson
The Self Reference Effect (SRE) is the ability to recall and recognise self-relevant stimuli with greater accuracy than other-relevant stimuli. Ownership is one established method of assigning ‘Self’- versus ‘Other’ relevance and hence influencing recognition memory (Cunningham et al., 2008). Originally, this research began in a physical setting. Since then, the ‘Shopping Task’ has become computerised and mere ownership over picture stimuli is harnessed to measure self-reference effects. We sought to take the shopping task out of the lab, and onto the net, with the first iteration of the online shopping task. Many factors modulate the strength of the SRE by shifting the boundary between the ‘Self’ and ‘Others’.
In this study, we investigated whether enhancing awareness of the ‘Self’ or the ‘Other’ referent changes the accuracy of recognition of self-and other-owned items. In experiment 1, participants described their own hobbies and traits. They were then informed about those of ‘Sam’, the ‘Other’ referent. An ownership allocation phase was followed by a memory test. In experiment 2, no details of the ‘Other’ were provided. Details of these results will be discussed.
Full Transcript:
Tessa Clarkson:
Okay. Hi, everyone. Today, I’m going to be talking a bit about my PhD research. Before I get into it, I’m just going to explain my topic of interest. I study something called the self-reference effect. The self-reference effect is, if you haven’t heard of it before, a memory bias. It is the tendency for people to encode information differently, depending on how that information is relevant to them. So typically, when people are asked to remember or recall information, they’re typically better at doing this when that information was relevant to them in some way. In psychology, there’s many different ways you can measure the self-reference effect and operationalize it. One way you could do it is through ownership. So this paradigm I’m about to describe was originally designed as a paradigm to occur between two participants in the lab, or a participant and opposing confederate.
Tessa Clarkson:
If you can imagine a bird’s eye view, we’ve got a participant and opposing confederate here, they enter into a lab setting and they’re given ownership over one of two baskets. Then the experiment just shows them a bunch of visual stimuli on picture cards, and these items are then sorted as being owned by the self, so owned by the participant, or owned by the other, and owned by the confederate. So, that’s encoding, and then participants are surprised with a surprise recognition memory test, where they’re shown all that same visual stimuli again, plus new items they haven’t seen before, and they’re asked to identify whether or not they remember that item or not. What the researchers found here was that self-owned items, that were encoded as being self-owned, were remembered more accurately than other owned items, and also recognized more quickly. This is the self-reference effect through ownership.
Tessa Clarkson:
Since the development of that paradigm, other researchers have been able to replicate this, but through a computerized virtual version. This is the task that I used, or was using in the lab. Instead of having real baskets and real items, I would show participants two bags on a screen. And if you can imagine what a trial would look like, if you look at that bottom square, you can see the bags followed by an item, then a color cue that would indicate ownership, and the participant would use computer keys, the left or right arrow keys, to sort those items. Then I do the same thing again, show all those same items again, plus new items that they haven’t seen before, and ask them know who owned that item. Typically, we find the same effect, where stimuli that’s encoded by the self is remembered better. So this was the evolution of a paradigm that went from a face-to-face paradigm and became computerized. Now I’m going to be talking about how I took that task that we did in the lab and how I made it a web-based paradigm.
Tessa Clarkson:
So this is just one of the many self-reference effect studies that me and my lab have been doing, but this is one I did recently. We used GORILLA, and so we created two online versions of this shopping task. One version we had… Before the participant did the task, they engaged in a conversational situation with the other person that they were going to be doing the task with. They learned certain details about that person, and learned about their interests and values and whatnot. And in the second version of the experiment, we didn’t tell them anything about the other person. We just said, “You’ll be doing a shopping task with another person.” And they were completely nameless.
Tessa Clarkson:
The results were really interesting. What we found was that in the first experiment, as indicated by this first white line here on the graph, was that when we gave participants context and information about that other person, they remembered the other person’s items better than their own. So this is going in the opposite direction of the self-reference effect. And in the second version, that was stripped down, where we didn’t provide any information at all, this normal self reference effect emerges. So we found this really cool boundary effect, where we found the boundary of where the self-reference effect no longer applied.
Tessa Clarkson:
Before we moved online in the lab, there were some concerns or anxieties that we had, naturally, that I think most people have. So now I just want to give some recommendations for things that I’ve learned since going online, that I think would be helpful for anyone who wants to do any sort of memory behavioral task. So these are some things that I recommend and learned along the way.
Tessa Clarkson:
Utilize full screen if you can, if you’re doing a behavioral experiment. If you can get your participants to engage in… If they’re using a browser to do the study, if you can minimize distraction as much as possible, get them to engage in the full screen. But just make sure that you give them instructions on how to exit full screen and regain control, should they wish to withdraw at any time.
Tessa Clarkson:
Pilot your experiments. We talked about this, it was brought up yesterday, how important piloting is. But pilot your experiments, specifically with non-lab members, to test the efficacy of your instructions. If you’re not going to be there to verbally instruct and guide your participant through, testing with non-lab members is really important to make sure that that task is fully understood. Set time limits. Make sure that you set time limits for completion, this will discourage interruptions and prevent people from walking away. And if they do walk away, and the timer is up, then it’s really easy to clean them out of the data. Use JPEG files. If you’re used to using E‑Prime or MATLAB, you might be more used to using bitmap images, but JPEGs work a lot faster online. They load a lot quicker, so I would recommend that. And test different browsers. When you’re piloting, get people to try out different browsers. I had a hard time with Internet Explorer for some reason. You might be completely fine with it, but just make sure you test out different browsers when you’re piloting.
Tessa Clarkson:
These are some of the benefits that I’ve experienced since going online with my research. It’s obviously very time effective. This experiment that I just told you about before, probably wouldn’t have been able to be conducted if it weren’t for GORILLA. It wasn’t a part of my PhD trajectory, and we only have so many years to do a PhD, as you would know, so using GORILLA made it really time effective. We had this question that we wanted to ask, and so we were able to do that thanks to online research.
Tessa Clarkson:
Obviously, the tasks are really easily replicated, but it was also really good for replicating my own design, and then being able to isolate a variable and change it and then send it off again. It was just really quick and easy, and I really think online research is great for that. It reduces experimental bias a lot as well, which I like about online research. If you’re not physically there to be able to influence your participant in a certain way, then that reduces experimenter bias, I think, especially for studies in social cognition. And I found really good comparable lab to online data. So my memory accuracy overall didn’t differ between online and in the lab. I’ll just quickly show you a comparison here. For my dependent variables, you can see this is lab data here and online data. You can see by these p values here, that the differences in memory accuracy was completely negligible. So what we found in the lab and what we found online is really comparable, and that’s great.
Tessa Clarkson:
Thank you. That’s as much as I have time for at the moment, but I’d love to chat with you guys more about online research. So if you do want to reach out, please send me an email. You can use this QR code here to check out the shopping task, if you want to have a look at the backend of that yourself. Thank you so much to GORILLA for making this all possible. And my wonderful advisory team and my really great lab, thank you so much for all your support.
Speaker 2:
Thank you very much, Tessa. Thank you. I should have said at the top, we’ll have time for one question, so if anybody would like to ask a question, please put that in the Q&A now. If more people have questions, keep asking them, because Tessa will be able to answer them online when she’s finished speaking. But if you don’t get a question up quickly, I’m going to ask the question, and you shouldn’t be forced to listen to me asking questions all afternoon. Just very quickly then, I was interested in your point about browsers and how that can interact with the task. What’s your feeling for why does that happen? Why do browsers make a difference?
Tessa Clarkson:
I think that just, maybe… I’m not really sure why we had trouble with Internet Explorer, I just… Yeah, I’m not really sure how it works, but I know that maybe visually it could impact what the study looks like. I think it’s important for people to know that different devices and different browsers could make things look a little different. And GORILLA’s really good at scaling your visual stimuli to a ratio, scale and size and everything like that, but it can look a little different, I guess, across browsers. Maybe some browsers are a little more sensitive to going into full screen mode, or there might be different things to consider there, so maybe that’s why, and I think that’s possibly why it’s really good to just test out all the browsers. Then if one isn’t cooperating, you can just very easily, in GORILLA, not let participants use that particular browser. Yeah.
Speaker 2:
Brilliant. Thank you.