Do Instructions Intended to Reduce False Positives Improve the Measurement of Physical Partner Violence Victimization Among Adolescents and Young Adults?

Objective: We examine how instructions to exclude behaviors occurring in playful or joking contexts influence the measurement of physical partner violence victimization. Specifically, we demonstrate how such instructions influence the prevalence and validity of self-reported victimization. Method: Study 1 used a Think Aloud procedure to evaluate thoughts of college students (n = 451) reporting victimization experiences that occurred during high school. Participants were randomized to report on physical partner violence victimization with or without instructions to exclude playful acts. Study 2 experimentally evaluated whether the instructions affect the criterion validity of victimization scores with measures of depressive symptoms and emotion regulation among first-year college students (n = 615). Study 3 sought to replicate findings from Study 2 in a community sample of 18–25-year-olds (n = 398), using alternative violence items, response formats, and a different recall period. Study 4 utilized a short-term longitudinal design to replicate the pattern of findings from Studies 2 and 3, and examine how instructions influence self-reports of revictimization over a 2-month follow-up among first-year college students (n = 887). Study 5 presents a single-paper meta-analysis that synthesizes prevalence rates across these four studies. Results: Overall, instructions designed to eliminate aggressive acts in joking contexts did not consistently influence prevalence rates of victimization or improve criterion validity over standard instructions. Conclusions: Instructions designed to exclude behaviors occurring in playful or joking contexts do not necessarily produce more valid self-reports of physical partner violence victimization, as compared with standard instructions

Source Credibility and Trust of Media Information Based on Gender of Reporter

An experiment was used for this study to explore if the gender of a reporter impacts perceived source credibility and thus trust in information. Previous research has shown how gender biases can affect how topics are covered, reported on, perceived and marketed in the journalistic world. Modern media and newsrooms are meant to mirror reality as they convey information to the public, yet women continue to be gatekept out of reporting on certain types of news. Further, changes in the mode of delivery of news are also impacting the journalism landscape. Thus, this study employed a digital stimulus to explore if gender bias impacts perceived trust and credibility of media information, updating dated scholarship in the area. The data shows that in this particular digitally focused inquiry, gender did not significantly impact the audience’s perceived credibility, but higher credibility did link to an increase in trust in the information provided. Future implications and limitations are discussed

Design prototyping methods

textProduct development is often modeled as a cycle between phases of designing, building, and testing. This work will explore early stage build efforts of product design, which is also known as prototyping. Prototyping is a critical determinant of product success. Research shows that different approaches to prototyping can greatly affect design outcome. This work provides an integrated overview, and expansion of the existing work on design prototyping methods. Following the introduction, an extensive literature review of design prototyping tools, techniques, and methods is provided. These sources are indexed and comparatively reviewed. The capabilities of a novel hybrid prototyping technique is explored through a design case study. Next, insights from the review are integrated in a context independent prototyping strategy method. The method is developed with heuristics extracted from the literature, and additional insights from experimental studies. The technique is then experimentally evaluated. Finally, results of an extensive study of an online design repository are provided. The results include five key principles for prototype design and fabrication. The presence of these principles in the repository is validated through a novel crowd-sourced online study. The outcome effects of deploying these principles to design teams is experimentally evaluated. Overall, this research provides a guide to prototyping which includes a systematically indexed review and comparison of the existing work, as well as a novel method, and principles for design and fabrication.Mechanical Engineerin

Relationship between quality and payment in crowdsourced design

In recent years, the “power of the crowd” has been repeatedly demonstrated and various Internet platforms have been used to applied collaborative intelligence to areas that range from open innovation to image analysis. However, crowdsourcing applications in the fields of design research and creative innovation have been much slower to emerge. So, although there have been reports of systems and researchers using Internet crowdsourcing to carry out generative design, there are still many gaps in knowledge about the capability and limitations of the technology. For example on crowdsourcing platforms, like Amazon’s Mechanical Turk, the relationship between remuneration and the final quality of designs has not been established, so it is unclear how much payment should be offered to ensure a particular standard of result. To investigate the relationship between crowd’s remuneration and the quality of their innovation, this paper reports how payment for a 2D interior design task (living room layout) was systematically varied and the quality of the output assessed by a ranking process designed that was also crowdsourced. Information about individual Mturk workers who participated in the study was also collected. The results suggest that while that average design quality only slowly increases, the quality of the “best” design generated by the crowd improved dramatically with payment levels. In other words, increasing monetary rewards does not improve the average creativity of design but rather it increases the chance of an excellent solution being generated by an individual in the crowd