El aprendizaje de la comprensión escrita

The research presented in this thesis began with the aim of examining the influence of the aesthetic qualities of a room on various

performance measures and primarily on the rating by subjects of negative print photographs of human faces for mood. The research

focussed on varying the level of pleasantness in a room setting and on how this variation influenced subjects' mood ratings of the photo­ graphs. A finding from Experiments 2 and 3 was that of higher photograph rating scores in an unpleasant room compared to a (more pleasant) average room. Four theories were examined in Experiment 4 which might explain this result. However as the research proceeded it became clear that experimenter effects also needed to be addressed. Experiment 6 provided direct evidence for experimenter effects by replicating Experiment 5 but with the removal of much of the opportunity for experimenter influence. This experiment yielded

different results. This chapter will firstly consider the evidence for experimenter effects, then consider the results obtained from the primary tests for room influence on mood ratings and incidental memory retention. Finally consideration will be given to future directions in research into environmental affective influence.

Experimenter effects

In Experiment 4 experimenter influence was not tested directly although there was some evidence to suggest that the experimenters influenced the scores here. The strongest evidence here was an analysis of

variance showing significant differences in the baseline arousal levels between the experimental room conditions. As these baseline measures were obtained from subjects in the Common room, before any sight or information about the experimental room they were to go to, such differences can only have come from the experimenter who did have knowledge of which room the subject was to be taken to. Further, the mean scores for the baseline levels of pleasantness and energy & well­ being were higher, although not significantly, in the pleasant room condition compared to the other room conditions. This trend of more pleasant mood for subjects to be taken to a more pleasant room is

intuitive and also implicates the experimenter in the mechanism through which this occurred. These baseline influences are despite the fact that the experimenters did not discuss any aspects about the nature of the experimental rooms with the subjects. Any mood influences which did occur here must have happened unwittingly.

The primary evidence for experimenter effects came from the results from a comparison of Experiments 5 and 6. The analysis of variance with the dependent variable of the photograph ratings showed a significant difference between the photograph rating scores between the two

experiments which can only have been due to the experimenter’s reduced involvement in Experiment 6. The equivalence otherwise of the two experiments in terms of design and method makes alternative explana­ tions in terms of artifacts such as subject sampling and time of day

the hypothesis scaling as covariate was significant in Experiment 5 and not in Experiment 6 demonstrating that subject's construal of the

importance of the room in the experiment was a determinant of the photograph ratings only in Experiment 5* This increased importance of the hypothesis scalings is most likely to have been due to the

increased involvement of the experimenter in the procedure. The mean scores for the photograph ratings in Experiment 5 were lower in the Room-Order and Salience conditions compared to the Control condition and also compared to the equivalent conditions of Experiment 6. These two room conditions uniquely involved room manipulations by the

experimenter to test the adaptation level and attribution theory accounts. These manipulations were carried out with written instruc­ tions to subjects in Experiment 6. Clearly the use of the experimenter to complete these manipulations in Experiment 5 had brought about lower photograph rating scores. It is possible to see that the photograph ratings might have been lower in the Room-Order condition through the presence of the experimenter, in line with an adaptation level

account. This interpretation is discussed in the next section. However lower photograph ratings also in the Salience condition through the presence of the experimenter is contrary to that predicted by

attribution theory and is not easily explained. This finding is also discussed in the next section. Nevertheless the results from

Experiments 4, 5 and 6 provide repeated evidence for experimenter effects. Such effects have occurred despite use of a paradigm specifically intended to maintain experimenter naivety. Post-

experimental questioning confirmed that the experimenters were naive to the deliberate intent of the room manipulations and the hypotheses being tested.

The nature of the experimenter influence which appears to have occurred in Experiment 4 is different to that tested in Experiments 5 and 6 and this difference is important. In Experiment 5 the experimenter was involved in specific independent manipulations relevant to the

hypotheses being tested. Removal of the opportunity for experimenter influence in Experiment 6 yielded different results for the tests of these hypotheses. However in Experiment 4 the experimenters were kept naive to the hypotheses being tested, as confirmed by post-experimental questioning, and the evidence here is for biasing of subjects' mood in the Common room depending upon the experimental room to which the

subject was to be taken to. This process appears to have occurred quite unwittingly by the experimenters, as confirmed by the post-experimental questioning.

There is also other evidence for experimenter influence as outlined above in Experiment 4, in terms of the difference between results from the sessions run by the experimenters initially for each room

condition, and those run for the same room condition, but after the experimenter had then run subjects in other room conditions. The photograph rating scores provided clearer interpretations from these initial session data than from the later data. Also a trend was noted that whilst the mean score in these initial sessions for baseline arousal was lower in the average room condition compared to the other two room conditions, as might be expected given the bland nature of this room, for the later sessions the mean score for the average room condition is higher than the other two room conditions. It is possible to speculate that this increase in arousal is due to the experimenter's interpretation of the average room as anything but 'average' in the

highlights the nature of the experimenter influence which appears to have occurred in Experiment 4, which is different to that found for Experiment 5* This can be described as the passing on to the subject by the experimenter, probably quite naively, some form of mood expectation about the room that the subject is to be taken to. If this is the case there are serious implications for this type of environmental research whenever a personal introduction is made by a supposedly naive

experimenter. As such a neutral baseline mood for the subject cannot always be assumed.

The demonstration of experimenter influence in this research also allows comment on the Maslow and Mintz finding. The research in this thesis has shown that experimenter knowledge of which experimental room he is to take subjects to, or involvement in room-specific manipula­ tions, can seriously bias the results obtained. In the Maslow and Mintz study the author, who was obviously not naive, took subjects to the appropriate experimental room. At the experimental room the subject was tested by an experimenter who tested subjects in both the ugly and pleasant rooms. In these circumstances, in the light of the evidence for experimenter effects outlined above, there is every reason to believe that experimenter effects occurred in the Maslow and Mintz experiment. In any event the general finding of Maslow and Mintz that photograph rating scores increase in a more pleasant setting has been disproved by Experiments 2, 3 and 4.

Primary tests

Adaptation level theory remains the most likely theory to explain higher photograph rating scores in an unpleasant room compared to a

theories which might explain this finding were investigated in

Experiment 4 and these theories and the results from test of these are