Search

People typically use verbal probability phrases when discussing risks ("It is likely that this treatment will work"), both in written and spoken communication. When speakers are uncertain about risks, they can nonverbally signal this uncertainty by using prosodic cues, such as a rising, question-like intonation or a filled pause ("uh"). We experimentally studied the effects of these two prosodic cues on the listener's perceived speaker certainty and numerical interpretation of spoken verbal probability phrases. Participants (N = 115) listened to various verbal probability phrases that were uttered with a rising or falling global intonation and with or without a filled pause before the probability phrase. For each phrase, they gave a point estimate of their numerical interpretation in percentages and indicated how certain they thought the speaker was about the correctness of the probability phrase. Speakers were perceived as least certain when the verbal probability phrases were spoken with both prosodic uncertainty cues. Interpretation of verbal probability phrases varied widely across participants, especially when rising intonation was produced by the speaker. Overall, high probability phrases (e.g., "very likely") were estimated as lower (and low probability phrases, such as "unlikely," as higher) when they were uttered with a rising intonation. The effects of filled pauses were less pronounced, as were the uncertainty effects for medium probability phrases (e.g., "probable"). These results stress the importance of nonverbal communication when verbally communicating risks and probabilities to people, for example, in the context of doctor-patient communication., (© 2024 The Authors. Risk Analysis published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society for Risk Analysis.)

Purpose: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are questionnaires completed by patients to gain insight in their health-related quality of life. However, patients often find the interpretation of PROMS challenging. A personalized narrative, i.e., a story with patients' experiences tailored to the reader, could help explain PROMs and might be appreciated alongside numerical outcomes. We studied how cancer patients perceive PROMs feedback presented in a regular numerical and a novel narrative format., Methods: Cancer patients who completed PROMs in routine clinical practice were recruited. All participants received numerical feedback and a personalized narrative. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to uncover perceptions of both formats. Interviews were analyzed with an inductive reflexive approach to thematic analysis., Results: Twenty-nine patients with breast cancer, melanoma, and bladder cancer participated. Thematic analysis identified six themes: "Understanding: I get the gist of it!"; "Usefulness: Tell me why I should complete PROMs"; "Format preferences: Numbers are cold, narratives are warm"; "Taking action: Can I do something about my score?"; "Personal relevance: Personalized narratives show me what life has in store for me"; and "Personal relevance: That's (not) me!" Numbers seemed to help participants act, whereas narratives may provide emotional support and recognition. Participants identified with the content of the narrative yet differed in how they related to the main character., Conclusion: Personalized narratives could be a useful addition to PROMs feedback. The studied formats seem to serve different purposes; numbers help to facilitate action, personalized narratives provide recognition., Implications for Cancer Survivors: Personalized narratives may be a useful new way to communicate about quality of life to cancer survivors and help them to envision what the impact of cancer can be., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: We (1) examined the effects of evaluative labels and visual aids on people's understanding, evaluation, and use of the COVID-19 reproduction number (or "r-number"), (2) examined whether people's perceived susceptibility and (intended) adherence to preventive measures changed after being exposed to the r-number, and (3) explored whether these effects and changes depended on people's numeracy skills., Methods: In an online experiment, participants from a large Dutch representative sample (N = 1,168) received information about the COVID-19 r-number displayed on the corona dashboard of the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport. The r-number was either presented with or without a categorical line display (i.e., evaluative label) and with or without an icon-based tree diagram (i.e., visual aid) explaining how the number works. Regarding people's use of the statistic, we measured perceived susceptibility to COVID-19 and adherence (intention) to five preventive measures before and after exposure to the r-number. After exposure, we also measured participants' understanding, perceived usefulness, affective and cognitive evaluation, and objective numeracy., Results: About 56% of participants correctly interpreted the r-number, with highly numerate people having better understanding than less numerate people. Information about the r-number was perceived as more useful when presented with a visual aid. There were no differences across experimental conditions in people's understanding, affective, and cognitive evaluations. Finally, independent of experimental conditions, intention to adhere to preventive measures was higher after seeing the r-number, but only among highly numerate people., Conclusions: Although evaluative labels and visual aids did not facilitate people's understanding and evaluation of the r-number, our results show that the statistic is perceived as useful and may be used to stimulate adherence to preventive measures. Policy makers and public health communicators are advised to clearly explain why they are giving these numbers to - especially - the less numerate people, but also how people could use them for behavior change to combat the spread of virus during a pandemic., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

People's risk perception of COVID-19 is an important predictor for adopting protective behavior. Although risk perceptions, and factors influencing these, may vary between countries, less attention has been paid to differences between adjacent regions from neighboring countries. In the midst of the first wave of the corona outbreak (March-April-May 2020), we measured risk perceptions as perceived threat (consisting of perceived severity and susceptibility) among university students (N = 668) in two connected countries: the Netherlands and Belgium. Theory-based predictor variables included experiential, efficacy-related, socio-cultural, cognitive, and demographic factors. While demographic variables and country were not significant predictors of perceived threat level, all other constructs were. Personal and indirect experiences with COVID-19, as well as higher scores on personal (self) efficacy to carry out recommended preventive behaviors were all associated with higher perceived threat. However, low collective efficacy and lower levels of trust in government were both also significantly associated with higher perceived threat, as was a low level of "lack of COVID-19 knowledge". These results hold implications for suitable risk communication strategies for increasing students' COVID-19 risk perceptions., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2023 Vromans et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Background: Adolescents and young adults (AYAs) diagnosed with cancer fulfill their cancer-related information needs often via the Internet. Healthcare professionals (HCPs) have a crucial role in guiding patients in finding appropriate online information and eHealth sources, a role that is often overlooked. Misperceptions of AYAs' needs by HCPs may lead to suboptimal guidance. We aimed to examine the extent to which AYAs' online information and eHealth needs corresponded with HCPs' perceptions of these needs., Methods: Two cross-sectional online surveys (AYAs, n = 299; HCP, n = 80) on online information and eHealth needs were conducted. HCPs provided indications of their perceptions of AYA's needs., Results: AYAs reported significantly more online information needs compared with HCPs' perceptions regarding: survival rates (AYA = 69%, HCP = 35%, p < 0.001), treatment guidelines (AYA = 65%, HCP = 41%, p < 0.001), return of cancer (AYA = 76%, HCP = 59%, p = 0.004), "what can I do myself" (AYA = 68%, HCP = 54%, p = 0.029), and metastases (AYA = 64%, HCP = 50%, p = 0.040). Significantly more unmet eHealth needs were reported by AYAs compared with HCPs relating to access to own test results (AYA = 25, HCP = 0%, p < 0.001), request tests (AYA = 30%, HCP = 7%, p < 0.001), medical information (AYA = 22%, HCP = 0%, p = 0.001), e-consult with nurses (AYA = 30%, HCP = 10%, p < 0.001), e-consult with physicians (AYA = 38%, HCP = 13%, p = 0.001), and request prescriptions (AYA = 33%, HCP = 21%, p = 0.009)., Conclusion: AYAs' online information and eHealth needs are partially discrepant with the impression HCPs have, which could result in insufficient guidance related to AYAs' needs. AYAs and HCPs should get guidance regarding where to find optimal information in a language they understand. This may contribute to AYAs' access, understanding, and satisfaction regarding online information and eHealth., (© 2022 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

This paper investigates origins and consequences of perceived profile text originality. The first goal was to examine whether the perceived originality of authentic online dating profile texts affects online daters' perceptions of attractiveness, and whether perceptions of (less) desired partner personality traits mediate this effect. Results showed the positive impact of perceived profile text originality on impression formation: text originality positively affects perceptions of intelligence and sense of humor, which improve impressions of attractiveness and boost dating intention. The second goal was to explore what profile text features increase perceptions of profile text originality. Results revealed profile texts which were stylistically original (e.g., include metaphors) and contained more and concrete self-disclosure statements were considered more original, explaining almost half of the variance in originality scores. Taken together, our results suggest that perceived originality in profile texts is manifested in both meaning and form, and is a balancing act between novelty and appropriateness., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Objective: We investigated how healthcare professionals (HPs) communicate personalized risks of treatment side-effects to patients with localized prostate cancer during consultations, and explored how these patients perceive and use such risks during treatment decision-making., Methods: Patient consultations with nurse practitioners and urologists discussing personalized risks of urinary incontinence after prostatectomy were audiotaped, transcribed, and coded. Patients (n = 27) were then interviewed to explore their perceptions and use of personalized side-effect risks., Results: HPs explained personalized risks by discussing risk factors, which was appreciated and recalled by patients. Personalized risks were typically communicated both numerically and verbally (70%). When using numbers, HPs always used percentages, but rarely used natural frequencies (14%). Uncertainty was disclosed in only 34% of consultations. One-third of patients used personalized risks in their treatment decision-making by either switching to another treatment or sticking to their initial preference., Conclusions: Patients value and use personalized side-effect risks during treatment decision-making. Clearly explaining the relationship between risk factors and personalized risk estimates may help patients understand and recall those. Practice implications HPs should not only give patients specific and precise numerical risk information, but should also put effort in explaining how the personalized side-effect risks are determined., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Most Western countries have websites that provide information on cancer and the opportunity to participate in online cancer communities (OCCs). The number of patients with cancer that participate in these OCCs is growing. These patients are relatively easy to approach for research purposes., Objective: The objective of this study is to determine the differences and similarities between survivors of cancer in population-based samples and survivors participating in OCCs who use the internet in relation to their illness., Methods: In 2017, we drew a sample of 539 population-based patients and 531 OCC patients. The population-based patients were sent a paper-based questionnaire, and the OCC patients were sent the same questionnaire on the web. In the questionnaire, we asked patients about their sociodemographics, internet use, sources of information, media use, and wishes regarding future internet use for health care-related purposes, and the effect of internet use on their health care consumption., Results: The response rate of population-based internet users was 47% (233/496), and that of the OCC group was 40.3% (214/531). The OCC group had a significantly higher education level (P<.001), was younger (P<.001), had more survivors that were employed (P<.001), and attached greater importance to the internet (171/214, 79.9% vs 126/233, 54.1%; P<.001) and fellow survivors (107/214, 50% vs 60/233, 25.8%; P<.001). Compared with the population-based group, the OCC group reported more intensive internet use immediately after diagnosis, during treatment, and during follow-up (P<.001 in each case). There were similarities in terms of the relative importance that survivors attach to the various sources of information, the topics on which they seek information, and their wishes for future eHealth possibilities. The OCC group reported a greater need to participate in a web-based class or chat with others (92/214, 43% vs 44/233, 18.9%)., Conclusions: We conclude that survivors who are members of an OCC are not representative of survivors of cancer in general. There are significant differences in sociodemographic characteristics, internet use during their treatment journey, internet search frequency during their cancer journey, and participation wishes. Using web-based information and communication can support shared decision-making and may facilitate the active participation of patients during their treatment. For research purposes, it is important to take the bias in OCC groups into account., (©Mies C van Eenbergen, Ruben D Vromans, Lidwine W Tick, Gerard Vreugdenhil, Emiel J Krahmer, Floortje Mols, Lonneke V van de Poll-Franse. Originally published in JMIR Cancer (https://cancer.jmir.org), 08.03.2022.)

Background: Our aim was to evaluate differences in cancer-related internet patterns between AYAs (adolescents and young adults; 18-39 years at time of diagnosis) and older adult cancer patients (40+ years)., Methods: Cross-sectional surveys were distributed among AYA and older adult cancer patients regarding cancer-related internet use and eHealth needs., Results: 299 AYAs (mean age 31.8 years) and 270 older adults (mean age 55.8 years) participated. AYAs searched significantly more often on the internet on a daily basis just before diagnosis (45% vs. 37%), right after diagnosis (71% vs. 62%) and during treatment (65% vs. 59%) compared to older adults. During follow up, there was a trend that AYAs searched less often on the internet compared to older adults (15% vs. 17%). AYAs searched more often on topics, such as alternative or complementary therapies, treatment guidelines, fertility, end of life, sexuality and intimacy, lifestyle and insurance. AYAs felt significantly better informed (75%) after searching for cancer-related information compared to older adults (65%) and had significantly less unmet needs regarding access to their own medical information (22% vs. 47%). AYAs search more on the internet on a daily basis/several times per week in the diagnosis and treatment phase than older cancer patients. They search on different topics than older adults and seems to have less unmet eHealth needs.It is important that these are easy to find and reliable.

Background: Disclosure of cancer statistics (eg, survival or incidence rates) based on a representative group of patients can help increase cancer survivors' understanding of their own diagnostic and prognostic situation, and care planning. More recently, there has been an increasing interest in the use of cancer registry data for disclosing and communicating personalized cancer statistics (tailored toward personal and clinical characteristics) to cancer survivors and relatives., Objective: The aim of this study was to explore breast cancer (BCa) and prostate cancer (PCa) survivor needs and preferences for disclosing (what) and presenting (how) personalized statistics from a large Dutch population-based data set, the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR)., Methods: To elicit survivor needs and preferences for communicating personalized NCR statistics, we created different (non)interactive tools visualizing hypothetical scenarios and adopted a qualitative multimethod study design. We first conducted 2 focus groups (study 1; n=13) for collecting group data on BCa and PCa survivor needs and preferences, using noninteractive sketches of what a tool for communicating personalized statistics might look like. Based on these insights, we designed a revised interactive tool, which was used to further explore the needs and preferences of another group of cancer survivors during individual think-aloud observations and semistructured interviews (study 2; n=11). All sessions were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, analyzed using thematic (focus groups) and content analysis (think-aloud observations), and reported in compliance with qualitative research reporting criteria., Results: In both studies, cancer survivors expressed the need to receive personalized statistics from a representative source, with especially a need for survival and conditional survival rates (ie, survival rate for those who have already survived for a certain period). Personalized statistics adjusted toward personal and clinical factors were deemed more relevant and useful to know than generic or average-based statistics. Participants also needed support for correctly interpreting the personalized statistics and putting them into perspective, for instance by adding contextual or comparative information. Furthermore, while thinking aloud, participants experienced a mix of positive (sense of hope) and negative emotions (feelings of distress) while viewing the personalized survival data. Overall, participants preferred simplicity and conciseness, and the ability to tailor the type of visualization and amount of (detailed) statistical information., Conclusions: The majority of our sample of cancer survivors wanted to receive personalized statistics from the NCR. Given the variation in patient needs and preferences for presenting personalized statistics, designers of similar information tools may consider potential tailoring strategies on multiple levels, as well as effective ways for providing supporting information to make sure that the personalized statistics are properly understood. This is encouraging for cancer registries to address this unmet need, but also for those who are developing or implementing personalized data-driven information tools for patients and relatives., (©Ruben D Vromans, Mies C van Eenbergen, Gijs Geleijnse, Steffen Pauws, Lonneke V van de Poll-Franse, Emiel J Krahmer. Originally published in JMIR Cancer (https://cancer.jmir.org), 25.10.2021.)

Background: The increased availability of patient reported outcome data makes it feasible to provide patients tailored risk information of cancer treatment side effects. However, it is unclear how such information influences patients' risk interpretations compared to generic population-based risks, and which message format should be used to communicate such individualized statistics., Methods: A web-based experiment was conducted in which participants (n = 141) read a hypothetical treatment decision-making scenario about four side effect risks of adjuvant chemotherapy for advanced colon cancer. Participants were cancer patients or survivors who were recruited from an online Dutch cancer patient panel. All participants received two tailored risks (of which the reference class was based on their age, gender and tumor stage) and two generic risks conveying the likelihood of experiencing the side effects. The risks were presented either in words-only ('common' and 'very common'), or in a combination of words and corresponding numerical estimates ('common, 10 out of 100' and 'very common, 40 out of 100'). Participants' estimation of the probability, accuracy of their estimation, and perceived likelihood of occurrence were primary outcomes. Perceived personal relevance and perceived uncertainty were secondary outcomes., Results: Tailored risks were estimated as higher and less accurate than generic risks, but only when they were presented in words; Such differences were not found in the verbal and numerical combined condition. Although tailoring risks did not impact participants' perceived likelihood of occurrence, tailored risks were perceived as more personally relevant than generic risks in both message formats. Finally, tailored risks were perceived as less uncertain than generic risks, but only in the verbal-only condition., Conclusions: Considering current interest in the use of personalized decision aids for improving shared decision-making in oncology, it is important that clinicians consider how tailored risks of treatment side effects should be communicated to patients. We recommend both clinicians who communicate probability information during consultations, and decision aid developers, that verbal descriptors of tailored risks should be supported by numerical estimates of risks levels, to avoid overestimation of risks.

Background: Given the major changes in internet use for health communication, the objective of the current study was to compare the internet use and wishes of cancer survivors between 2005 and 2017., Methods: The authors drew a sample of 390 patients in 2005 and 539 patients in 2017 who were diagnosed with breast (128 patients in 2005 and 143 patients in 2017), prostate (96 patients in 2005 and 126 patients in 2017), or gynecologic (89 patients in 2005 and 188 patients in 2017) cancer or lymphoma (77 patients in 2005 and 82 patients in 2017) in 4 different hospitals for the periods 2002 through 2004 and 2014 through 2016. These patients were sent a paper-based questionnaire that contained 45 questions regarding demographics and 4 functions of internet use: content, communication, community, and e-health., Results: The response in 2017 (53%) was lower than that in 2005 (75%). Survivors browsed the internet most frequently to search for information regarding cancer shortly after being diagnosed and while waiting for treatment. There was little change noted with regard to the relative importance attached to the various subjects. In 2017, significant increases were evident with regard to finances (+33%), health care insurance (+29%), and genetics and/or heritability (+27%). The wishes expressed in 2005 by patients were realized in part in 2017., Conclusions: A significant sample of cancer survivors in the Netherlands have indicated that the internet is an important source of information regarding their illness. However, little change was evident over the past 15 years with regard to patients' priorities regarding their wishes for internet use. The wishes of users in 2005 were found to accurately reflect the internet use of the majority of patients in 2017. The results of the current study support the belief that health care professionals should expand their online services and tailor them toward the needs and wishes of their patients., (© 2019 The Authors. Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Cancer Society.)

Context: Despite increasing interest in the development and use of decision aids (DAs) for patients with localized prostate cancer (LPC), little attention has been paid to communicative aspects (CAs) of such tools., Objective: To identify DAs for LPC treatment, and review these tools for various CAs., Materials and Methods: DAs were identified through both published literature (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and PsycINFO; 1990-2018) and online sources, in compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Identified DAs were reviewed for the International Patient Decision Aid Standards criteria, and analyzed on CAs, including information presentation, personalization, interaction, information control, accessibility, suitability, and source of information. Nineteen DAs were identified., Results: International Patient Decision Aid Standards scores varied greatly among DAs. Crucially, substantial variations in use of CAs by DAs were identified: (1) few DAs used visual aids to communicate statistical information, (2) none were personalized in terms of outcome probabilities or mode of communication, (3) a minority used interactive methods to elicit patients' values and preferences, (4) most included biased cross tables to compare treatment options, and (5) issues were observed in suitability and accessibility that could hinder implementation in clinical practice., Conclusions: Our review suggests that DAs for LPC treatment could be further improved by adding CAs such as personalized outcome predictions and interaction methods to the DAs. Clinicians who are using or developing such tools might therefore consider these CAs in order to enhance patient participation in treatment decision-making., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

In psycholinguistics, there has been relatively little work investigating conceptualization-how speakers decide which concepts to express. This contrasts with work in natural language generation (NLG), a subfield of artificial intelligence, where much research has explored content determination during the generation of referring expressions. Existing NLG algorithms for conceptualization during reference production do not fully explain previous psycholinguistic results, so we developed new models that we tested in three language production experiments. In our experiments, participants described target objects to another participant. In Experiment 1, either size, color, or both distinguished the target from all distractor objects; in Experiment 2, either color, type, or both color and type distinguished it from all distractors; In Experiment 3, color, size, or the border around the object distinguished the target. We tested how well the different models fit the distribution of description types (e.g., "small candle," "gray candle," "small gray candle") that participants produced. Across these experiments, the probabilistic referential overspecification model (PRO) provided the best fit. In this model, speakers first choose a property that rules out all distractors. If there is more than one such property, then they probabilistically choose one on the basis of a preference for that property. Next, they sometimes add another property, with the probability again determined by its preference and speakers' eagerness to overspecify. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

The first aim of this study was to analyze video-mediated communication (VMC), in comparison to face-to-face (FTF) communication, and the effect it has on how communicators express nonverbal affiliative behaviors relevant for social attraction. Second, this study aimed to discover whether these nonverbal expressions relate to communicators' social attraction. An experiment with 93 cross-sex dyads was conducted, with a get-acquainted exercise in a VMC or a FTF condition. Our findings revealed that communicators in VMC smiled more and spoke louder. In addition, VMC interactants displayed less facial touching than FTF interactants. Finally, more gaze aversion and a higher speech rate were found to influence social attraction. These findings have implications for research on cue-rich computer-mediated communication (CMC) and the way in which communicators nonverbally express themselves in comparison to copresent FTF communication. Additionally, this study has implications for social information processing theory which may be extended to include cue-rich forms of CMC.

Objective: Relatives of cancer patients often play a crucial role in care, while their own needs generally receive scant attention. We investigate those topics on which relatives share information online., Methods: We coded user-generated content written by 185 relatives on a major Dutch cancer site (kanker.nl), into three main categories: 'Disease', 'Well-being' and 'Other subjects'. In addition, we analysed five websites (from five countries) for which content they provide that is relevant for relatives., Results: Our analysis showed that across cancer types, relatives share online information and emotions. Quantitative analysis showed that they mainly write about topics related to their own well-being (blog posters: 45% of the posts and group posters 64%). Blog posters found the disease-related topics more important than the group posters (45% and 29%)., Conclusions: This study has shown that relatives share different kinds of user-generatedcontent related to their own situation. This could be a valuable resource for further research into the needs of relatives, and a very useful source for identification of emotional and informational topics., Practice Implications: It is crucial that relatives are enabled to occupy their own space in the disease-and-treatment process appropriate to their needs and to help avoid caregiver burden., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

According to common belief, friends communicate more accurately and efficiently than strangers, because they can use uniquely shared knowledge and common knowledge to explain things to each other, while strangers are restricted to common knowledge. To test this belief, we asked friends and strangers to play, via e-mail and face-to-face, the word-description game Taboo , in which objects need to be described without using certain "taboo" words. When descriptions were sent via e-mail, there was no difference in accuracy (number of correct answers) nor in efficiency (number of words per correct answer) between friends and strangers. When descriptions were given face-to-face, friends were more accurate than strangers, but not more efficient (number of seconds and words per correct answer). Shared knowledge did not predict accuracy or efficiency. Hence, our findings do not support the idea that friends only need a few words to understand each other., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

In a production experiment (Experiment 1) and an acceptability rating one (Experiment 2), we assessed two factors, spatial position and salience, which may influence the production of relational descriptions (such as "the ball between the man and the drawer"). In Experiment 1, speakers were asked to refer unambiguously to a target object (a ball). In Experiment 1a, we addressed the role of spatial position, more specifically if speakers mention the entity positioned leftmost in the scene as (first) relatum. The results showed a small preference to start with the left entity, which leaves room for other factors that could influence spatial reference. Thus, in the following studies, we varied salience systematically, by making one of the relatum candidates animate (Experiment 1b), and by adding attention capture cues, first subliminally by priming one relatum candidate with a flash (Experiment 1c), then explicitly by using salient colors for objects (Experiment 1d). Results indicate that spatial position played a dominant role. Entities on the left were mentioned more often as (first) relatum than those on the right (Experiments 1a-d). Animacy affected reference production in one out of three studies (in Experiment 1d). When salience was manipulated by priming visual attention or by using salient colors, there were no significant effects (Experiments 1c, d). In the acceptability rating study (Experiment 2), participants expressed their preference for specific relata, by ranking descriptions on the basis of how good they thought the descriptions fitted the scene. Results show that participants preferred most the description that had an animate entity as the first mentioned relatum. The relevance of these results for models of reference production is discussed.

The tearing effect refers to the relevance of tears as an important visual cue adding meaning to human facial expression. However, little is known about how people process these visual cues and their mediating role in terms of emotion perception and person judgment. We therefore conducted two experiments in which we measured the influence of tears on the identification of sadness and the perceived need for social support at an early perceptional level. In two experiments (1 and 2), participants were exposed to sad and neutral faces. In both experiments, the face stimuli were presented for 50 milliseconds. In experiment 1, tears were digitally added to sad faces in one condition. Participants demonstrated a significant faster recognition of sad faces with tears compared to those without tears. In experiment 2, tears were added to neutral faces as well. Participants had to indicate to what extent the displayed individuals were in need of social support. Study participants reported a greater perceived need for social support to both sad and neutral faces with tears than to those without tears. This study thus demonstrated that emotional tears serve as important visual cues at an early (pre-attentive) level.