sj-7z-4-ipe-10.1177_20416695231209846 - Supplemental material for Eyes can tell: Assessment of implicit attitudes toward AI art

Supplemental material, sj-7z-4-ipe-10.1177_20416695231209846 for Eyes can tell: Assessment of implicit attitudes toward AI art by Yizhen Zhou and Hideaki Kawabata in i-Perception</p

sj-csv-3-ipe-10.1177_20416695231209846 - Supplemental material for Eyes can tell: Assessment of implicit attitudes toward AI art

Supplemental material, sj-csv-3-ipe-10.1177_20416695231209846 for Eyes can tell: Assessment of implicit attitudes toward AI art by Yizhen Zhou and Hideaki Kawabata in i-Perception</p

sj-csv-1-ipe-10.1177_20416695231209846 - Supplemental material for Eyes can tell: Assessment of implicit attitudes toward AI art

Supplemental material, sj-csv-1-ipe-10.1177_20416695231209846 for Eyes can tell: Assessment of implicit attitudes toward AI art by Yizhen Zhou and Hideaki Kawabata in i-Perception</p

Conjunction analysis of <i>desirable > indifferent</i> (displayed at the threshold <i>P_uncorrected <</i>0.001).

<p>Peak activity was located in the mid-cingulate cortex (MC above) (0, 2, 36, SVC). Another activation was in anterior cingulate cortex (AC above) (0, 34, 4 SVC). Both are shown in sagittal section (A). Parameter estimates for the three stimulus categories and for the three desirability classifications for MC (B) and for AC (C). The peak activity voxel in MC at 0, 2, 36 falls within the cluster of active voxels shown in <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0003027#pone-0003027-g006" target="_blank">Fig 6B</a> which exhibit a quadratic relationship with desirability.</p

sj-csv-2-ipe-10.1177_20416695231209846 - Supplemental material for Eyes can tell: Assessment of implicit attitudes toward AI art

Supplemental material, sj-csv-2-ipe-10.1177_20416695231209846 for Eyes can tell: Assessment of implicit attitudes toward AI art by Yizhen Zhou and Hideaki Kawabata in i-Perception</p

Sematic diagram of a typical trial during the blind choice task.

<p>Participants were required to press a key to initiate a trial (A), followed by a presentation of fixation for 1 s (B). Next, two identical dummy faces were presented for 10 ms (C) and followed by masking stimuli presented for 1 s (D). After the dummy faces were presented, participants were asked to respond in accordance with an instruction (e.g., “CHOOSE” represents to choose a preferred face). Once completed the response, target faces were presented (F). Note that participants were instructed that target faces were presented two times within a trial, one in C and another in F.</p

Temporal recalibration occurs with averaged SOAs.

<p>Probit analysis was used to fit the proportion of stimuli that participants judged as delayed for each SOA (ms) in Experiment 3: 100 ms, 66 ms+133 ms, and 33 ms+166 ms conditions. There was no change in delay judgments as a function of SOA condition.</p

Post-choice change in preference in Experiment 4.

<p>Change in preference ratings for chosen and unchosen facial stimuli after blind choice between two equally preferred faces in the Experiment 4 (choice of a preferred face between two alternatives). Note that participants rated their preference for faces after they explicitly knew that their choices had been actually random. Bars indicate differences in mean-corrected ratings between the pre- and post-choice rating tasks. Error bars represent standard errors (SE) of the mean.</p

Locations shown in sagittal section and parameter estimates showing modulation by desirability rating (A) linear (1^st order) relationship in SOFC at −6, 46, −4, (B) quadratic (2^nd order) relationship in MC at −2, 2, 36.

<p>Locations shown in sagittal section and parameter estimates showing modulation by desirability rating (A) linear (1^st order) relationship in SOFC at −6, 46, −4, (B) quadratic (2^nd order) relationship in MC at −2, 2, 36.</p

Behavioral data collected in the fMRI study.

<p>(A) Distribution of desirability classifications by stimulus category, averaged over all subjects. Range shows minimum and maximum percentages among subjects. (B) Averaged response times in milliseconds by stimulus category and response classification. S.D. shows sample standard deviation. Range shows minimum and maximum response times, which were averaged within subject, among subjects. Each stimulus category includes 72 trials (a total of 216 trials for a subject).</p