Search

The evaluation of a soundscape is a challenging task as the object of study is not a stationary event of sensation but rather a dynamic and complex scene stretching over a specific period. To do justice to the time dimension in such acoustic scenes, we utilized the Continuous Evaluation Procedure (CEP). Extending common standard instruments asking participants for a singular integral at the end of the sound experience (e.g., on a rating scale), the participants in this study were enabled to continuously evaluate the evolving acoustic scene of accelerating electrified vehicles (EVs) using CEP. With the increasing electrification of powertrains in the automotive industry, acoustic engineers face the challenge of defining innovative sounds using the availabilities of now low-noise emission platforms of EVs that deviate in their noise profiles from familiar but technologically outdated internal combustion engine vehicles (ICEVs), which have defined the general sound schemes for more than a century. To capture dynamic aspects in the quality perception of powertrain noise in EVs, we asked 37 participants to evaluate acoustic recordings of different vehicles in varying acceleration modes in a high-quality three-dimensional (3D) acoustic simulator. Thereby, we revealed much more detailed and timedependent quality aspects, which do not come forth in an integral singular measure (ISM) where all impressions experienced during the ongoing acoustic scene are blended together. We, therefore, propagate the systematic application of the CEP method when it comes to the qualitative evaluation of transient acoustic scenes. CEP opens the great opportunity to unfold, detect, and analyze dynamic effects in soundscapes and noise profiles, but of any kind of acoustic signal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Numerous challenges that arise in the field of art history require recourse to expertise in perceptual psychology. In addition to explaining the meaning that people attach to individual works of art and their content, the effect that arises in the recipient is essential to deciding whether the work of art could adequately represent a statement. In addition, with in-depth knowledge of the human act of perception, it is easier to understand what people can and cannot process, when, and how. Art and perception have always formed a unity, as a work of art has no meaning without perception. Artists often acted as intuitive psychologists who understood very well how human perception works and how certain effects can be achieved. Accordingly, art history, which is dedicated to art from a historical perspective, requires precisely this expertise in a systematic manner to adequately depict, describe, and explain the dimension of perception. The following programmatic paper aims to make clear why both disciplines should work closely together and shows what such fruitful paths of joint work could look like. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Universities frequently offer support programs to assist first-year students with the transition from school to the university. The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of different mentoring styles on mentee academic performance after 1 year and 2 years of study. Participants consisted of 417 psychology students who started their course of study in the 2007/2008 winter term at the University of Vienna. Three hundred twenty-eight students participated voluntarily in the peer mentoring program, Cascaded Blended Mentoring, in which they were supported by 48 peer mentors (advanced students) in small groups. Eighty-nine students did not participate in the mentoring program. The mentoring groups were classified according to one of three mentoring styles described by Leidenfrost, Strassnig, Schabmann, Carbon, and Spiel (2011): (b) motivating master mentoring, (b) informatory standard mentoring, and (c) negative minimalist mentoring. Our data suggest that participants in the mentoring program performed better in their studies than students who did not participate in terms of average grade and number of courses passed. There was, however, no specific impact of the different mentoring styles on mentee academic performance.

Ambivalence describes a conflict between contrasting valences, for example, when an image appears bitter but sweet. Such a potential for revealing ever-new facets of an object or situation might trigger interest that has been related to a combination of perceptual challenge with anticipation of coping or new experience. Interest might be even intensified when we heighten our awareness of the potential multiplicity of interpretations. We present two studies with artistic photographs examining the relationship between ambivalence and interest. The first study utilized explicit evaluations and revealed a positive relationship between estimated ambivalence and interest as well as an increase in interest after exploring positive and negative semantic facets of an image. The second study utilized a forced-choice paradigm that was captured by a high-speed eyetracker. It defined dwell time and choice-ratio as alternative measures of interest. When we asked participants which of two images they wanted to learn more about, they chose ambivalent photos more often and looked slightly longer at them. We discuss these findings and further examine the potential role of artistic context for interest in ambivalence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Our words shape our thinking, our thinking creates action. Scientific terms can be particularly influential when used in everyday language in terms of allegedly scientific arguments that back certain views or actions. Such use can be especially toxic when the terms refer to concepts that are ill-defined, outdated or questionable themselves. The term “good genes” represents an exemplary case in this regard. It refers to the belief system of eugenics and implies a moral perspective. The latest political debates demonstrate how easily such terms and concepts are employed to induce racist thinking and action; in the end it may even result in specific medication, selective investment in medical treatment, and so ultimately impacting the life and death of patients. Science has the obligation to explicitly opt-out from such lines of argument, and to routinely check and re-think its theories, concepts and vocabulary.