English
 
User Manual Privacy Policy Disclaimer Contact us
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Released

Journal Article

Seeing is Believing? Comparing Negative Affect, Realism and Presence in Visual Versus Written Guardianship Scenarios

MPS-Authors
There are no MPG-Authors available
External Ressource
Fulltext (public)
There are no public fulltexts stored in PuRe
Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available
Citation

Van Gelder, J.-L., Martin, C., Van Prooijen, J.-W., De Vries, R., Marsman, M., Averdijk, M., et al. (2018). Seeing is Believing? Comparing Negative Affect, Realism and Presence in Visual Versus Written Guardianship Scenarios. Deviant Behavior, 39(4), 461-474. doi:10.1080/01639625.2017.1407106.


Cite as: http://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-0004-66B9-9
Abstract
We compared participant responses on three written guardianship scenarios versus visualized versions of the same scenarios in terms of realism, presence, negative affect elicited by the situation, perceived risk, and the choice to intervene. We find that people who received the visual scenarios report higher presence, but not realism, than those who received the written version. Furthermore, visual scenarios elicited stronger negative affect and resulted in a lower likelihood to intervene. Finally, presence, but not negative affect, mediated the relation between condition and the choice to intervene. Implications of the visual scenario method for future research are discussed.