Last updated: March 07th, 2022 Contact: Olivia Cheung: olivia.cheung@nyu.edu Oliver Heyn: oliver.heyn@nyu.edu Tobiasz Trawinski: trawint@hope.ac.uk ----------------------------------------- Preference at first sight: Effects of shape and font qualities on evaluation of object-word pairs ----------------------------------------- This OSF website contains the data used in the analyses presented in the “Preference at first sight: Effects of shape and font qualities on evaluation of object-word pairs” (vision-1578751) manuscript. Here we included 3 data files: 1) PilotStudy_RatingRT.csv: Preference rating and RT dataset from the Pilot study 2) MainStudy_RatingRT.csv: Preference rating and RT dataset from the Main study 3) MainStudy_EyeMovements.csv: Four of eye movement datasets from the main study: First fixation index, First fixation duration, Total fixation count, and Total dwell time. and 2 analysis files: 1) AllAnalyses.html: The results of the analyses conducted in R are presented in the HTML file 2) AllAnalyses.Rmd: The analysis code in R ################################################################################ # PILOT STUDY ################################################################################ In the pilot study, 18 participants from the NYUAD community were presented 400 grayscale images and were asked to provide preference ratings on a 5-point scale, with 1 being the lowest (‘not at all’) and 5 being the highest (‘very much’). See the data set 'PilotStudy_RatingRT.csv' for the mean preference rating and reaction time data calculated across the selected 96 objects (48 preferred and 48 disliked) and 96 fonts (48 preferred and 48 disliked). ################################################################################ # MAIN STUDY ################################################################################ In the main study, another group of 24 participants (undergraduates from the NYUAD, UAE) were asked for preference rating of the object-word pairs on a 5-point scale (1 indicates ‘not at all’, whereas 5 indicates ‘very much’) while their eye movements were recorded. Each pair consisted of an abstract object with either preferred or disliked shape qualities and a nonsense word with either preferred or disliked font qualities. The selection of preferred and disliked shape and font qualities were based on the results from the pilot study. See the data sets 'MainStudy_RatingRT.csv' and 'MainStudy_EyeMovements.csv' ----------------------------------------- Abbreviations used in the data set ----------------------------------------- 1. Participant - participant ID 2. ShapeQuality - Shape quality (preferred vs. disliked) 3. FontQuality - Font quality (preferred vs. disliked) 4. Position - location of the object and word in relation to the center of the screen (Object-Word vs.Word-Object) 5. Focus - location of fixations (object vs. word) 5. RT - response time in ms 6. PreferenceRating - preference rating of the object-word pairs on a 5-point scale (1 indicates ‘not at all’, whereas 5 indicates ‘very much’) 7. CURRENT_FIX_INDEX - first fixation index 8. FIRST_FIX_DURATION - first fixation duration 9. FIX_COUNT - total fixation count 10. FIX_TOTAL_TIME - total dwell time in ms