| Literature DB >> 25170878 |
Daniel L Bride1, Sheila E Crowell1, Brian R Baucom1, Erin A Kaufman1, Caitlin G O'Connor1, Chloe R Skidmore1, Mona Yaptangco1.
Abstract
Research in psychology and affective neuroscience often relies on film as a standardized and reliable method for evoking emotion. However, clip validation is not undertaken regularly. This presents a challenge for research with adolescent and young adult samples who are exposed routinely to high-definition (HD) three-dimensional (3D) stimuli and may not respond to older, validated film clips. Studies with young people inform understanding of emotional development, dysregulated affect, and psychopathology, making it critical to assess whether technological advances improve the study of emotion. In the present study, we examine whether 3D film is more evocative than 2D using a tightly controlled within-subjects design. Participants (n = 408) viewed clips during a concurrent psychophysiological assessment. Results indicate that both 2D and 3D technology are highly effective tools for emotion elicitation. However, 3D does not add incremental benefit over 2D, even when individual differences in anxiety, emotion dysregulation, and novelty seeking are considered.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25170878 PMCID: PMC4149373 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0105554
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Local polynomial smoothed plots of EDA, PEP, and RSA in 2D and 3D during the first presentation of My Bloody Valentine.
Values on the Y-axis represent physiological reactivity (i.e., baseline scores subtracted from task scores). Shading depicts 95% confidence intervals.