The effects of slow motion on viewers’ emotional and

cognitive processing

This study examined the effects of Slow Motion on the physiological, emotional,

and cognitive responses of college participants while watching negative and positive

television messages. Results indicate that the presence of slow motion does not affect the

orienting responses. It was also reported that it takes time for slow motion to increase

cognitive efforts in viewers, slow motion affects the experience of negative emotions

rather than positive emotions, and slow motion has little, if any, affect on arousal

response in viewers. Theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed.

Slow Motion 2

Introduction This study attempts to examine how slow motion and emotional content interact

to influence viewers’ attention, memory, and attitudes. Slow motion is a structural feature

of TV mediated messages, which is frequently used by program directors. It is a

conventional belief that slow motion will amplify and exaggerate emotional elements of a

scene (Millerson, 1961; Zettl, 1976; Armer, 1986). Even though TV directors exploit

slow motion almost habitually, its effects on viewers’ mental processes have received

little study.

In recent decades, the effects of structural features in TV production have

received considerable attention. These structural features include cuts, edits, movement,

sound, graphics and tabloid packaging (Fox et al, 2002; Geiger & Reeves, 1993; Grabe,

Zhou, Lang, & Bolls, 2000; Lang, Bolls, Potter, & Kawahara 1999; Reeves et al., 1985;

Thorson & Lang, 1992). It has been suggested that these features play important roles in

attracting and maintaining viewers’ attention. The interaction between structural features

(e.g. pacing) and some attributes of content (e.g. emotion) has also been examined (Lang,

1990; Lang et al., 2000).

The limited capacity theory (Lang, 2000) has provided major theoretical

background for much of the research on structural features. The theory posits that the

capacity of mental processing is limited. In the theory, the orienting response (OR) is one

mechanism through which viewers automatically allocate processing resources. The OR

is one way in which the message guides the selection of information for further

processing. One reason to use a structural feature might be to elicit the momentary

allocation of processing resources. However, all structural features do not elicit ORs.

This study is designed to determine whether slow motion elicits an OR and to explore

how slow motion affects other mental processes such as encoding.

This study also attempts to examine how slow motion interacts with emotional

experience. A dimensional approach to emotion is employed in this study. Specifically,

this study conceptualizes emotion as the result of two underlying motivational systems:

the appetitive (or approach) system and the aversive (or avoidance) system. These two

systems can be activated separately (Cacioppo & Berntson, 1994; Cacioppo & Gardner,

Slow Motion 3

1999). Thus, slow motion could have different effects on the aversive and appetitive

systems. This study explores these possibilities

The Limited-Capacity Model The limited capacity approach suggests that the human capacity available for

information processing at any one time is limited (Geiger & Newhagen 1993; Lang,

2000). A. Lang (2000) has proposed a data based limited capacity model as a basic tool

for the further research of the mental processing of mediated messages (Lang, 2000;

Lang, Borese, Wise, & David, 2002; Potter, 2000).

According to the limited capacity model (LCM), information processing is

composed of at least three subprocesses and two mechanisms. The three subprocesses are

encoding, storage, and retrieval. The mental processing of TV viewing involves the

simultaneous and continuous activation of these subprocesses. The required metal

resources are allocated to the three subprocesses. However, total mental resources are

limited, which means the subprocesses are related and circumscribe each other. The

model proposes separate measurements for each subprocess. Specifically, recognition

indexes encoding, cued recall measures storage, and free recall operationalizes retrieval.

In this model, the allocation of mental resources occurs through automatic and controlled

processes. Viewers control some aspects of the allocation of processing resources

according to their willingness to attend to and remember a message. Here, viewers’

motivation, intention, and interest come into play on the distribution of the resources.

This controlled (voluntary) allocation of processing resources occurs over a relatively

long-term period (e.g. minutes or hours).

A televised message can also exert control over the automatic allocation of

processing resources by eliciting orienting responses in viewers. Some structural and

content features have been shown to evoke the orienting response, resulting in the

automatic allocation of mental resources to encoding. If the mental resources are

sufficiently available, the three subporcesses such as encoding, storage, and retrieval will

be performed fully. However, when insufficient resources are available, some aspects of

processing will be harmed. For example, if a message causes many resources to be

allocated to encoding, it may result in a shortage of resources available for storage. In

short, the model presents that medium use, such as TV viewing, is a dynamic and

Slow Motion 4

interactive processing of the medium and the viewer within the bounds of the limited

pool of mental resources.

The Orienting Response and Effects of Structural Features As noted previously, the OR is a mechanism in the LCM that leads the automatic

allocation of processing resources to encoding (Lang, 2000). There are two types of

stimuli which evoke ORs: signal and nonsignal stimuli (Sokolov, Spinks, Naatanen, &

Lyytinen, 2002). Nonsignal stimuli denote novel or uncertain events, which are new or

not expected in the current environment. Signal stimuli are things that the organism has

learned are important (e.g. a person’s name or the ringing of the dinner bell).

Research in the LCM indexes orienting responses with certain patterns of phasic

cardiac-response curves, while a long-term deceleration in the heart rate data is used to

index long term cognitive effort or resource allocation (Lang et al., 2002, Potter, 2000).

Two patterns of cardiac-response curves indicate orienting responses: the monophasic

pattern and the biphasic pattern (Lang, 1990; Potter, 2000). The size or amplitude of the

cardiac-response curve (i.e. a larger decrease) also indexes a larger orienting response.

Lang et al. (1993) tested if unrelated cuts elicited larger orienting response than related

cuts. Even though both cuts and edits elicited orienting responses, there was no difference

in the magnitude of the ORs.

A series of studies have revealed effects of cuts and edits on message processing

of viewers (Lang et al, 1993; Lang et al, 1999; Lang et al, 2000). In these studies, a cut

denotes a complete change from the one visual scene to another. An edit is defined as a

camera change within the same visual scene. An edit is semantically and perceptually

more related to the preceding shot than a cut. A cut was also categorized into related and

unrelated cuts in terms to its relatedness of both video and audio information (Lang et al.,

1993).

Most commonly, slow motion starts with a related cut. It is very rare that slow

motion is associated with an unrelated cut except for in some promotions. Thus, this

study will examine how the addition of slow motion interacts with related cuts. As

mentioned previously, things identified as important elicits an OR. TV directors have

used slow motion long time to indicate and emphasize a crucial moment. With the

presence of slow motion viewers may notify automatically something important is

Slow Motion 5

happening on screen. Thus, this study predicts that slow motion segments will be

accepted as signal stimuli, and then elicit an OR in viewers. This leads to the first

hypothesis.

H1: The onset of slow motion will elicit larger orienting responses than that of

related cuts with normal speed.

The next question is whether slow motion will result in the allocation of

additional resources to a message following the time period associated with the OR. This

may depend on how slow motion influences the content of the message. More difficult

content requires that more cognitive resources be allocated in order to make sense of it as

compared to easier content (Thorson & Lang, 1992). In a study examined the effects of

graphics on the processing of news programs, college subjects showed similar patterns

for attention to the difficult and easy stories in the graphics conditions (Fox et al. 2002).

Yet, in the no graphics condition heart rate was significantly slower for the difficult

stories than for the easy stories. This presents that the addition of the graphics appears to

reduce the cognitive effort required to understand difficult stories. Thus, viewers didn’t

allocate more resources to difficult stories. Studies also have shown slower secondary

task reaction times to unrelated cuts than to related cuts (Geiger & Reeves, 1993; Lang et

al 1993). Unrelated cuts introduce more new information requiring viewers to allocate

more resources. These findings suggest that what amount of resource allocation a

message requires influence viewers’ cognitive efforts to the message.

Slow motion might make content easier to process because viewers can easily

access details of the movements. In that case, slow motion segments will require fewer

resources to process than normal speed shots. However, this story will be changed if

arousal comes in to play. Arousing content evokes automatic allocation of processing

resources in viewers to storage and encoding (Lang et al., 1999). This will result in

slower heart rates in viewers. If the addition of slow motion increases arousing level of a

message, viewers will show slower heart rates. This makes a prediction for heart rate

response difficult. This study asks a question about the effect of slow motion on heart rate

response.

RQ1: How will the addition of slow motion change heart rates in viewers during

the slowed segments?

Slow Motion 6

Effects of Slow Motion on Arousal Even though many researchers have studied emotion, the conceptualization of it is

not consistent through research. Two approaches in this area are prevalent in defining and

categorizing emotion. One is to view emotion as a system of discrete categories

(Plutchik, 1962). Research in this approach is to search primary emotional states such as

anger, fear, and sadness and to study the results of various combinations of those discrete

states. The other is to examine the underlying dimensions in generating emotions

(Bradley, 1994; P.J. Lang, 1984; P.J. Lang, Bradley, & Cuthbert, 1990). In the

dimensional approach, emotional experience is composed of primarily two motivational

factors of directions (i.e., towards or away) and intensity (i.e., calm or aroused). The

motivational dimensions of direction and intensity are explored by valence, which

denotes an organism’s disposition to approach (positive) or avoid (negative), and arousal,

which indicates an organism’s responses with varying degrees of activation (Bradley,

2000; P.J. Lang, Bradley, & Cuthbert, 1990). Positive emotion is usually generated in the

context of approaching a desired goal (e.g. food, mating). Negative emotion facilitates the

withdrawal of an organism from aversive sources (e.g. fearful animal).

The relative importance of valence and arousal has been widely argued in

research on mediated messages. Studies have reported conflicting results on the effects of

positive and negative messages on viewer’s information processing (Lang, 1991;

Newhagen & Reeves, 1992; Lang, Dhillon & Dong, 1995; Bolls, Lang & Potter, 2000).

However, most studies agree that arousing messages are recognized and remembered

better than calm messages (Bradley, Greenwald, Petry & Lang, 1992; Grabe et al., 2000;

Lang et al., 1999).

Research in communication has investigated the effects of certain content and

structural features on viewers’ emotional and cognitive responses using the dimensional

theory (Lang, 1990; Lang & Friestad, 1993). Previous research has shown that many

structural features of media messages increase the self-reported or physiological arousal

in viewers including fast pacing (Lang et al., 2000), motion (Detenber, Simons, &

Bennett, 1998), and text graphics (Fox et al, in press). Grabe, Lang, & Zhao (2003)

showed that tabloid packaging increased both self-reported and physiological arousal.

Slow motion was one of the packaging structural features. Barnet and Grabe (2000)

Slow Motion 7

examined the effects of slow motion on viewers’ evaluation of television news stories.

Using negative stories, they found that the slow motion version elicited a more aroused

feeling from viewers than the standard speed version using self-reported measure. Thus:

H2: During slow motion, self-reported and physiological arousal will increase.

Interaction between Slow Motion and Message Valence If positive and negative motivational systems are separable, as noted earlier, how

differently are they activated? For this question, two concepts, negativity bias and

positivity offset, were developed (Cacioppo & Gardner, 1999). Positivity offset means

that an organism shows a weak approach tendency when no information is provided

about the environment. Negativity bias means that physical and mental activations

responding to negative stimuli increase more sharply than those to positive events.

Many research studies have found the considerable influence of negativity bias in

the processing of mental and behavioral systems. In a series of event related potentials

(ERPs) studies, it was found that negative stimuli received greater activity processing

than neutral and positive ones. Ito, Larson, Smith, and Cacciopo (1998) examined the

different activation of positive and neg ative substrates at the stage of categorization

using ERPs. An evaluation can be expressed and measured at two stages: evaluative

categorization and response output. ERPs are more sensitive to the evaluative

categorization than the output stage. To exclude the influence of arousal, the arousal

ratings for positive and negative stimuli were controlled to be equally extreme. They

found that, compared to neutral stimuli, both negative and positive stimuli elicited larger

amplitude late positive brain potentials during the evaluative categorization. It was also

found that negative stimuli elicited larger amplitude late positive brain potentials than

positive ones.

In another ERP study (Ito and Caccippo, 2000), an implicit negativity bias was

demonstrated. They assessed responses to the implicit and explicit categorization of

stimuli among evaluative (positive and negative) and non-evaluative (people and no-

people) contexts. Evaluative and non-evaluative stimuli were crossed completely to

create four blocks: positive-people, positive-no people, negative-people, and negative-no

people. In explicit conditions, participants were requested to count silently the number of

positive or negative pictures (or the number of pictures with people or without people).

Slow Motion 8

Mean arousal ratings were equal through all four categories. One of the results was that

negative stimuli automatically received greater processing than positive stimuli. This

suggests that negative stimuli receive greater weight in overall evaluations than positive

stimuli, even when viewers are not explicitly aware of their experiences.

Contrary to the amount of evidence for negativity bias, positivity offset has not

been examined as much. There is an important study showing the activities of both. Ito,

Cacioppo and P.J. Lang (1998) examined positivity, negativity and arousal ratings of 472

slides from the International Affective Picture System. They divided the slides into two

groups – positive and negative sets. Mean arousal ratings were used as an indication of

intensity levels for each evaluative system. They found a higher intercept value of the

regression line for the set of positive slides and a steeper slope for the negative set of

slides.

It has not been examined how structural features influence viewer’s responses to

negative and positive content of mediated messages. It was noted earlier that slow motion

might amplify emotional response of the viewers. In relation to the dimension of valence,

slow motion might increase viewers’ pleasant feelings to positive content and unpleasant

feelings to negative content.

A problem testing this question is that slow motion will be added to

approximately the middle part of the message as only a portion of the whole message. In

the experiment, viewers will be asked to evaluate the whole message. It is not sure how

much a portion of change will influence the evaluation of the whole messages. An

approach in studying relative emotional processing provides a clue to the question.

Kahneman (1999) argued that the retrospective representation of an emotionally

fluctuating message would be well predicted by a function of the peak experience and the

experience recorded just before the end of the episode (i.e. the peak-end rule). In a study

by Fredricson and Kahneman (1993), subjects were exposed to aversive and pleasant film

clips that varied in duration and emotional intensity. Experimental group ranked the films

from memory; the control group was asked to make evaluations on-line. Duration didn’t

matter for viewers’ evaluation from their memory. However, there were high correlations

between global evaluations from memory and the average of Peak-End real time

evaluations. The correlations were .78 for pleasant films and .69 for unpleasant films.

Slow Motion 9

In this study, slow motion will be added to the part of high emotional expressions such as

tearing, beating, and kissing. The addition of slow motion might increase the peak level,

influencing the evaluation of the whole message.

However, the effects of slow motion on evaluations for the (un)pleasantness of

the whole message are not still clear. It should be noted that arousal levels for each

positive and negative stimuli will be controlled to be as close to what it was before

adding slow motion. From the previous notions, this study asks:

RQ2: Will the presence of slow motion increase positive feelings of the viewers

for the positive messages?

RQ3: Will the presence of slow motion increase negative feelings of the viewers

for the negative messages?

When the presence of slow motion increases (un)pleasantness evaluations,

negative bias might occur in the responses. Slow motion might create a context of closer

distance in the Miller’s experiment. This leads into anther question.

RQ4: Will there be a content by form interaction for the extent of the increased

positivity and negativity of the viewers by adding slow motion, such that the amount of

negativity in viewers increased by adding slow motion will be larger than that of positive

experience produced by adding slow motion?

The presence of slow motion might also impact differently on arousal responses

for each positive and negative message. This study also explores the question.

RQ5: Will there be a content by form interaction for the extent of the increased

arousal level of the viewers by adding slow motion, such that the amount of arousal

response to negative messages increased by adding slow motion will be larger than that

of arousal response to positive messages produced by adding slow motion?

Effects of Slow motion on Memory retrieval If slow motion makes content easier to understand, then slow motion will require

fewer resources to process. In addition, if adding slow motion evokes the viewers more

aroused, it will attract more resource allocation to encoding and storage processes.

Research on the relationship between arousal and memory has consistently reported that

arousing content is remembered better than calm content. Bradley, Greenwald, Petry, and

P. Lang (1992) examined the effect of valence and arousal on memory using slides

Slow Motion 10

presenting various emotional contents. The slides were selected from the International

Affective Picture System (IAPS). The IAPS was constructed as participants from many

different cultures and places rated how they felt when viewing the pictures on separate

dimensions of emotions (Greenwald & P. Lang, 1985).

Bradley et al (1992) found that performance on immediate free recall, indexing

short-term retrieval, was better for arousing slides than for calm slides. When controlled

arousal, pleasant slides were remembered slightly better that unpleasant slides. Lang,

Dhillon, & Dong (1995) examined whether the findings of Bradley et al (1992) could be

applied to television messages. The results confirmed the previous findings. First, it was

found that the arousal dimension is more predictive variable in determining memory than

the valence dimension. Arousing TV messages were remembered better than calm

messages. They also found that when arousal was controlled, positive messages were

remembered slightly better than negative messages. From these findings, hypothesis 3

was posed:

H3: Before adding slow motion, messages rated as positive will be remembered

better than those rated as negative, when controlled arousal.

And, if slow motion evokes the viewers more aroused;

H4: Free recall will be better for video information presented during slow motion

than those for the same video information presented without slow motion.

This study asked whether adding slow motion affects pleasant and unpleasant

messages in different ways. This leads a set of hypotheses:

H5a: If the presence of slow motion results in levels of arousal responses that are not

significantly different to positive and negative messages, positive messages will be

recognized better than negative ones.

H5b: If the presence of slow motion results in levels of arousal responses that are

significantly different to positive and negative messages, the more arousing messages,

whether positive or negative, will be better recognized.

Impact of Slow Motion on Liking

Within the realm of the LCM, some studies have shown how evaluations of

mediated messages are influenced by content and structural features. In successive

studies, Grabe and colleagues have found that tabloid packaging, which includes slow

Slow Motion 11

motion, reduces the believability of facts in news stories (Grabe et al., 2000; Grabe et al.,

2003; Barnett & Grabe, 2000). Interestingly, it was found that the tabloid packaging also

reduces the enjoyability of the news stories (Grabe et al., 2000). This provides some

implications for research on attitudes and cognitive processing of TV viewing. First,

production structural features have noticeable impact on message evaluation. Second,

structural features have different influences on different genres of messages. It should

also be noted that the evaluation will influence short or long term mental processing of

mediated messages. For example, viewers will give more attentional efforts to interesting

or favorable messages (Lang, Greenwald, Bradley, & Hamm, 1993).

rom this notion, it is worth examining how a structural feature, slow motion in

this study, will influence evaluations of the messages. This study will use messages from

entertainment programs. Yoon, Bolls, & Lang (1998) reported that fast paced

advertisements produced higher favorable attitudes to non-claim elements. This suggests

that a structural feature can enhance liking of an easy, non-informative messages. This

leads to the last hypothesis.

H6: Viewers will like the slow motion version more than the non-slow version.

Method Design

The design for this experiment was a Slow Motion (2) X Valence (2) X Message

(3) X Order of Presentation (6) mixed factorial design. Slow motion and valence were

within subjects factors whereas order of presentation was a between subjects factor.

Slow motion had two levels, slow motion and normal speed version. Stimuli consisted of

the slow motion and normal speed versions of 12 television message clips. Valence also

had two levels: pleasant (positive) and unpleasant (negative). Among the 12 clips, half

was selected from positive content and the other half had negative content. Slow Motion

and Valence were fully crossed to create four different blocks (normal speed-positive,

normal speed-negative, slow motion-positive, and slow motion-negative).

Initially selected was 36 television message clips from the several genres of the

television program, which vary in terms of valence. The collected 36 clips were narrowed

down to twelve during a pretest. In the pretest, subjects were asked if they felt pleasant or

unpleasant and how aroused they were employing the Self Assessment Mannikin (SAM)

Slow Motion 12

measurement (Bradley et al, 1992). Arousal level was controlled so as not to be

significantly different between positive and negative messages. Arousal level was also

controlled so as to be in the middle range of the scale.

After selection of 12 clips, the slow motion version was created by editing slow

motion into middle part of the original clips, producing another 12 messages. In the main

experiment, each participant viewed a total of 12 clips, six clips from the slow motion

version (three positive and three negative) and six from the normal speed version (three

positive and three negative). For each version, half was positive and the other half was

negative. In this design, the between variable, Order of Presentation played an important

role. By Order of Presentation, the slow and normal speed versions of the same clip was

separated, thus subjects didn’t watch the same clip with the different versions. For

instance, if a subject in the first order watched three positive normal speed messages, and

then, another subject in the second order watched the slowed version of the same three

positive messages or vice versa. Thus, Slow Motion actually was a between subject

variable. In the analysis, the three messages in each of the four blocks were merged

across the subjects and this is how slow motion was treated as a within subject variable.

The Message factor represented the first, second, and third message seen in each Slow

motion by Valence category. This design, converting between subject variable to within

subject variable by merging, has been used in previous research (Fox et al., 2002; Grabe,

Lang, & Zhao, 2003). The Order of Presentation was also to control order effects. Study

participants were randomly assigned to one of the six presentation orders.

Stimulus materials

The raw materials for the stimuli, 12 television message clips were attained from

a VHS tape library used for a content analysis study (Gantz & Schwartz, 2002). The tapes

were recorded over the period of 11 weeks from March until May in year 2000. The

channels recorded were ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX, TNT, ESPN, CNN, Nickelodeon, and

MTV, totally seven markets. The researcher selected the clips with two criteria:

emotional content and inclusion of active shots. Half of messages among finally selected

twelve stimuli contained pleasant content (spring break dancing, caressing, kissing,

mother-daughter reunion, news about an swimming winner and winning cars), and half

were unpleasant content (news about fire, hurt from sky diving, fist fighting, carrying

Slow Motion 13

dead body, earthquake, and gun fighting). In the negative fighting scenes, it was

noticeable that good people were beaten and killed by bad scoundrels. It was necessary

for the clips to include some active shots, which could be slowed down. Active shots

were defined as a range of the movements of camera and objects in a shot. For instance, a

person’s tears of happiness after meeting a lost child. The happy, facial expression

presented in a close up shot was the least movement of the range. The most active

movements were scenes such as dancing, fist fighting or cheering spectators.

The selected clips were edited to control approximate duration. The clips ranged

in length from 58 seconds to 75 seconds. The clips were also edited to be composed of

three parts; before, during and after slow motion segment. Slow motion was added to the

highly emotional parts of the messages. The duration of the slow motion segments ranged

from 16 seconds for shortest to 28 seconds for longest. Except the two extremes, other

ten messages ranged from 20 seconds to 25 seconds. In order to have slow motion over

16 seconds, the slow motion segments were composed of several camera shots. It should

be noted that the first shot of the slow motion segments were manipulated to be six

seconds at least. It was necessary in order to examine orienting responses. Drawing

cardiac response curves from the onset of any stimulus requires six seconds at the

minimum to illustrate orienting response. The detail will be discussed in the variable

section.

Adobe Premiere software was used to create slow motion, which is a nonlinear

video editing application. Slow motion was created at the level of 40 percentage of

normal speed. A major problem of adding slow motion was that it lengthened the shot

duration. The editing shouldn’t have changed each shot and overall segment length. This

was avoided by cutting a part of the shot controlling duration. This elicited another

problem. Subjects viewed more visual information in normal speed versions. The

researcher tried to shun this problem as much as possible by including the critical parts of

each shot and eliminating the peripheral parts in editing. Audio was identical for slow

and normal speed versions.

Participants

Fifty nine college students were recruited from telecommunications courses at a

major Midwest University. They were given extra credits for their participation.

Slow Motion 14

Procedure

Participants completed the experiment individually. On arrival, each participant

was greeted and asked to sign a consent form. After signing the form, participants were

seated in front of a television monitor and electrodes were attached to their forearms and

non-dominant hand. They were told to watch the 12 story clips on the television screen

the entire time.

A booklet including SAM scales (arousal and valence) and evaluation scales were

placed on a clipboard and given to the participants before the experiment. The

experimenter briefly explained how participants should rate responses and then asked if

the participants had any question. When the participants were ready, the experiment

started.

Participants’ heart rate, skin conductance, facial electromyography (EMG) were

measured while they were watching the messages. Following each message, the tape was

stopped and participants rated the messages on SAM and evaluation scales. After all 12

stories were viewed, the participants conducted another experiment not related to this

study as a memory distraction task.

After that, the electrodes were disconnected and participants completed free recall

questionnaire. After participants were done, they were thanked and dismissed.

Independent variables

Slow motion Slow motion was defined by a degree of moving speed, which was created

by the Adobe Premier software. Movements were slowed down to approximately 40

percent of normal speed.

Content valence Content valence, conceptualized as a dimension of emotional tone

ranging from positive to negative, was measured using the SAM (self-assessment

mannikin) scale (Bradely et al, 1992). SAM is nine point pictorial scales designed to

measure three dimensions of emotional response: arousal, valence and dominance. The

SAM scale has been recognized as a reliable and valid measure of perceived emotion in

television messages (Lang et al., 1995; Morris, 1995).

Dependent Variable

Orienting Response The OR was operationalized as phasic decrease of heart rates. There

are two patterns of cardiac response curves indicating an OR: monopahsic and biphasic

Slow Motion 15

(Graham, 1979; Lang, 1990; Potter, 2000). A monophasic curve exposes an immediate

decrease of heart rate and reaches bottom at the 6th or 7th beat. Then, by the 10th beat, it

recovers to the baseline levels exhibiting U shape. A biphasic curve shows a rapid, initial

decrease to about two beats. Then heart rate increase follows the initial decrease up to

around the 7th beat and then recovers to the baseline level creating S shape. Either shape

is indexed for an OR.

A two-part procedure was used to test the presence of an OR. Visual inspection of

the CRC was performed to see whether it indicated one of the two characteristic shapes.

Detection of either shape represented an OR. After a visual inspection, a significance test

was conducted for a trend analysis. Trend analysis confirmed whether it supported the

visual inspection with a statistical significance. Only the first shots of the slow motion

segments were included in the analysis of orienting responses. As previously mentioned,

the first shots of the slow motion segments were at least six seconds in length. Six

seconds are minimum number in examining orienting responses by cardiac response

curves. Actually, there were no other more-than-six-second shots except the first shot of

the slow motion segments. It also should be noted that onset points of the slow motion

segments had the same visual information with those of the same segments at the normal

speed versions. This prevented confounding effects from different information at the

onset points.

Cognitive effort Heart rate was measured to operationalize tonic level of cognitive

efforts. The operationalization has been adopted in many studies (Lang, 1990, Lang,

Newhagen and Reeves, 1996). These studies consistently reported that slower heart rate

indicates increased cognitive efforts to an external stimulus. Participants’ heart rate data

were collected during the five-second baseline and the whole period of each story. Heart

rate was recorded as milliseconds between beats and converted to heart rate per second.

Then, later the data were averaged over one second period for analysis. Heart rate data

were used to track how cognitive efforts fluctuate over the course of a message clip and

especially for comparison of cognitive efforts during the slow motion segment in the

different versions.

Valence Response SAM was used to examine how the presence of slow motion affects

responses in the valence dimension for positive and negative messages. Facial EMG was

Slow Motion 16

also used to measure the valence of emotional response to television messages. Facial

EMG measures “the electrical signal generated by the occurrence of action potentials

across a group of muscles dedicated to moving particular parts of the face” (Bolls, Lang,

& Potter, 2001, p632). The valence of emotional response is commonly indexed by facial

EMG obtained from the zygomatic and corrugator muscle groups. The zygomatic muscle

group, also called the smile muscle group, is shaped along the cheek just above the both

sides of the lip. The corrugator muscle, associated with frowning, is grouped over the

brow just off the bridge of the nose (Fridlund & Izard, 1983). Positive response to a

message should increase activity in zygomatic muscle and negative response should

increase corrugator muscle activity (Bolls, Lang, & Potter, 2001).

Arousal Arousal was measured in two ways; SAM scale and by tonic skin conductance

level during the message presentation. Tonic skin conductance level has been used in

many studies to report physiological arousal (Dawson, Schell, & Filion, 2000; Stern, Ray,

& Quigley, 2001). Skin conductance was collected with a pair of standard Beckman Ag-

AgCI electrodes. The electrodes placed on the palm of the participant's non-dominant

hand. Skin conductance was measured over time because slow motion unfolds over time.

Memory retrieval Memory retrieval was operationalized by free recall measure.

Following presentation of all 12 television messages, subjects were asked to write down

all the information segments they could remember from both visual and auditory

information.

Liking Participants were asked to complete a questionnaire designed to measure their

liking for the stories. The questionnaire included four ten-point bipolar scales; (a) not at

all interesting/very interesting, (b) not at all enjoyable/very enjoyable, (c) not at all

favorable/ very favorable, and (d) don’t like at all /like very much. The first three scales

were selected from two studies (Grabe, Lang, and Zhao, 2003; Yoon, Bolls, & Lang,

1998). In addition, this study attempted to ask whether participants like a message in an

explicit way. From the reason, the last scale (don’t like at all /like very) was included.

The test was conducted on each sub-scale.

Analysis As noted earlier, the stimuli were composed of three parts, before, during, and

after the slow motion segment. And the created slow motion segments ranged from 16

Slow Motion 17

seconds to 28 seconds. The average time of the slow motion segments were 22 seconds.

In order to compare the slow motion segments across the messages at the same time

basis, the slow motion segments were divided by 22 time points. After this, all

physiological data were averaged between each time point yielding the same 22 time

points for the slow motion segments across all the messages. Ten-second time period was

analyzed for the segments before and after slow motion. Physiological data (heart rate,

skin conductance, and facial EMG) were submitted to either a 2 (Slow motion) X 2

(Valence) X 42 (Time) X 3 (Message) X 6 (order) repeated measure ANOVA in

analyzing whole message or 2 (Slow motion) X 2 (Valence) X 22 (Time) X 3 (Message)

X 6 (order) repeated measures ANOVA in analyzing only the slow motion segment.

Time was included as a variable in the analysis because physiological response unfolds

across time (Cacioppo, Tassinary, & Berntson, 2000; Lang & Friestad, 1993). In addition,

it made it possible to reveal whether impacts of slow motion take time to occur or not.

The free recall data were scored either as 1(hit) or as 0(miss) and analyzed by a 2 (Slow

motion) X 2 (Valence) X 3 (Message) X 6 (order) repeated measures ANOVA design.

Results Manipulation Check

A manipulation check was performed to make sure that the positive messages

were more positive than the negative messages and the arousing response was not

significantly different across valence. The SAM Valence and Arousal ratings for the

normal speed message were used. The valence scores were submitted to a mixed 2

(valence) X 3 (messages) X 6 (order of presentation) repeated measures ANOVA. The

main effect for Valence was significant (F (1, 48) = 92.073, p< .001). The subjects

reported more positive scores for the positive messages (M = 6.429, SE = .150) than the

negative messages (M = 3.789, SE = .158). In addition, the positive message mean was

more positive than neutral score (5) and the negative message mean was more negative

than neutral score (5). There was no significant main effect of Valence on the arousal

ratings (F <1), indicating that arousal was successfully controlled. The mean score was

5.442 for the positive messages and 5.401 for the negative messages, respectively.

Overall, these results show the intended manipulations were successful.

Slow Motion 18

Hypothesis1

This hypothesis predicted that the cut to a slow motion segment (called onset of

slow motion) would elicit larger orienting responses than the cut to the same shot at

normal speed. The predicted interaction of either Slow Motion X Time or the quadratic

trend, however, was not significant (for both, F < 1 ). The main effect of Time factor,

however, was significant (F (5, 230)= 18.620, p< .001) and the quadratic component was

also significant (F(1, 46)= 5.385, p =< .025). This indicates that the onset elicited

orienting responses for both slow and normal speed conditions. This is shown in Figure 1.

< Insert Figure 1 Here >

Research Question1

This research question asked whether the addition of slow motion would decrease

heart rates in viewers during the slowed segment. First, this analysis was done by

examining heart rate changes during the whole message time (i.e. 42 time points). There

was no significant interaction of Slow motion X Time (F (41, 1845) = 1.034, p = .412).

Then, examined was heart rate change during the slow motion segment that unfolded

over the 22 time points. A significant interaction of Slow motion X Time was observed

(F (21, 966) = 1.581, p = .047). Shown in Figure 2, slower heart rate occurs during

second half part of the segment in the slow motion version compared to that in the normal

speed version.

< Insert Figure 2 here >

The previous studies have reported that heart rate was slower during exposure to

negative messages compared to positive messages (Bolls, Lang, & Potter, 2001; Lang,

Newhagen, & Reeves, 1996). An analysis was performed for Valence X Time over the

whole message in order to see if this study replicates the same result. This is important

because this analysis would reveal whether the stimuli used in this study are valid or not.

There was a significant interaction of Valence X Time (F (41, 1845) = 3.653, p < .001) as

Slow Motion 19

shown in Figure 3. Overall, the result, showing slower heart rate for negative messages,

corresponds to those of the previous studies.

< Insert Figure 3 here >

Hypothesis 2

This hypothesis predicted that self-reported and physiological arousal would

increase responding to the slow motion version. For the self-report data, the main effect

of Slow Motion on the arousal dimension was not significant (F <1). For the SCL data,

the main effect of Slow Motion approached significance (F (1, 47) = 3.262, p = .077) in

the analysis of the whole message, but was not in the direction predicted. The subjects

showed more arousing response to the normal speed segments (M = -.215, SE = .071)

than to the slow motion ones (M = -.301, SE = .078). The interaction of Slow motion X

Time was significant (F (41, 1927) = 2.197, p < .01) as shown in Figure 4. This figure,

representing SCL changes across the whole message, suggests that skin conductance

level drops more during the slow motion messages than it does during the normal speed

messages.

< Insert Figure 4 here >

Research Question 2

This question asked if the presence of slow motion would increase viewers’

positive feelings during the positive messages. To test this hypothesis, only positive

messages were included in analysis. For the self report data, the main effect of Slow

motion on SAM Valence ratings approached significance level (F (1, 48) = 2.917, p =

.095), but not in the direction predicted. Participants reported more positive feeling

during normal speed versions (M = 6.429, SE = .15) than during slow motion versions (M

= 6.156, SE = .182).

For the zygomatic data, the 22 time points corresponding to the slow motion segment

were analyzed. There was no significance for either the main effect of Slow motion or the

Slow Motion 20

interaction of Slow motion X Time on zygomatic response (F (21, 987) = 1.131, p =

.308).

Research Question 3

This question asked if the presence of slow motion would increase negative

feelings of the viewers for the negative messages. This was performed by analyzing only

the negative messages. For the self report data, the main effect of Slow motion was not

significant but showed the predicted tendency (F (1, 48) = 2.122, p = .152). The subjects

reported somewhat more negative feeling to the slow speed segments (M = 3.565, SE =

.154) than to the normal slow speed segments (M = 3.789, SE = .158). For the corrugator

data, the first analysis was done by examining corrugator response changes during the

whole message time (i.e. 42 time points). There was no significant interaction of Slow

motion X Time (F (41, 1927) = 1.088, p = .324). Then, examined were the corrugator

data of the slow motion segment that unfolded over the 22 time points. The main effect of

Slow Motion was significant (F (1, 47) = 5.061, p = .029). The subjects showed more

corrugator response during slow motion segment (M = .518, SE = .62) than during

normal segment (M = -1.694, SE = .647). The Slow motion X Time interaction

approached significance level (F (21, 987) = 1.448, p = .087) and is shown in Figure 5.

< Insert Figure 5 here >

Research Question 4

This research question asked if there would be a Valence X Slow Motion

interaction for any of the valence measures. For the self-report and zygomatic data, there

was no significant Slow Motion X Valence interaction. When examined the corrugator

data during the slow motion segment, however, there was a significant interaction of

Slow Motion X Valence (F (1, 47) = 1.428, p = .039) which is shown Figure 6. The

interaction reveals that adding slow motion elicited higher corrugator responses,

indicating more negative responses, for the negative messages while corrugator responses

were reduced for the positive messages.

Slow Motion 21

< Insert Figure 6 here >

Research Question 5

This question asked if there would be a Valence X Slow Motion interaction such

that slow motion would have a larger effect on arousal during negative messages

compared to positive messages. For the self-report, there was no significant interaction of

Slow Motion X Valence on arousal ratings. For the SCL data, the interaction of Slow

Motion X Valence X Time was significant (F (41, 1927) = 5.257, p = .026) in the

analysis of the whole message, but in unpredicted way. This is shown in Figure 7. From

the interaction, it seems that adding slow motion didn’t impact viewers’ arousal on the

negative messages, but reduced arousal on the positive messages.

< Insert Figure 7 here >

Hypothesis 3

This hypothesis predicted that before adding slow motion, messages rated as

positive would be remembered better than those rated as negative, when arousal was

controlled. To test this hypothesis, only the messages without slow motion were

analyzed. There was a significant main effect of Valence on free recall (F (1. 48) =

16.054, p < .001). As predicted, the positive messages were recalled better (M = 2.02)

than the negative messages (M = 1.41).

Hypothesis 4

This hypothesis predicted that free recall would be better for video information

presented with slow motion compared to for the same video information presented

without slow motion. The main effect of Slow motion on free recall was not significant

(F <1).

Hypothesis 5

This hypothesis predicted that if the presence of slow motion results in levels of

arousal responses that are not significantly different to positive and negative messages,

positive messages would be recalled better than negative ones. However, if the presence

Slow Motion 22

of slow motion results in levels of arousal responses that are significantly different, the

more arousaing messages, whether positive or negative, would be better recalled.

According to the self report data, adding slow motion didn’t increase arousal in viewers.

Thus, prediction would the same as the hypothesis 3. The main effect of Valence was

significant on free recal (F (1, 48) = 15.434, p < .001). The positive messages were

recalled better (M = 2.00) than the negative messages (M = 1.49). There was no

significant Slow Motion X Valence interaction on free recall.

Hypothesis6

This hypothesis predicted viewers would like the slow motion version more than

the non-slow version. The liking measurements consisted of four sub-scales, enjoyable,

favorable, interesting and liking. The four subscales were analyzed respective. Against

the prediction of the final hypothesis, there was no main effect of Slow Motion on any

measurement. On the other hand, the main effect of Valence was significant for all four

sub scales. The main effect of Valence on viewers’ ratings of ‘enjoyable’ was significant

(F(1, 48) = 43.067, p < .001), with the positive messages more enjoyable (M = 5.752)

than the negative messages (M = 4.146). There was no significant interaction of Slow

Motion X Valence on the variable, ‘enjoyable’. For viewers’ ratings of ‘favorable’, the

main effect of Valence was significant (F(1, 48) = 37.038, p < .001), with the positive

messages more favorable (M = 5.323) than the negative messages (M = 4.007). There

was no significant interaction of Slow Motion X Valence on the variable, ‘favorable’. For

viewers’ ratings of ‘interesting’, the main effect of Valence was not significant, but the

Slow Motion X Valence interaction approached significance (F(1, 47) = 3.553, p = .065),

as shown in Figure 8.

< Insert Figure 8 here >

For viewers’ ratings of ‘liking’, the main effect of Valence was significant (F(1,

48) = 26.589, p < .001), with the positive messages more favorable (M = 5.568) than the

negative messages (M = 4.143). There was also a significant interaction of Slow Motion

X Valence (F (1, 47) = 4.313, p = .043), as shown in Figure 9.

Slow Motion 23

< Insert Figure 9 here >

Discussion The findings of the current study can be summarized as 1) the presence of slow

motion does not affect the orienting responses, 2) it takes time for slow motion to

increase cognitive efforts in viewers, 3) slow motion affects the experience of negative

emotions rather than positive emotions, and 4) slow motion has little, if any, affect on

arousal response in viewers. Although some of the findings were against prediction, the

findings provide interesting answers for how slow motion works on cognitive processing

and physiological responses in viewers.

The result demonstrated slow motion didn’t elicit considerable difference in

magnitude of orienting response compared to normal speed. This suggests that slow

motion didn’t require or allocate more cognitive resources. Slow motion decreases speed

of motion, thus the viewers may be able to process information easily without more

resource. However, slow motion still elicited the same magnitude of orienting responses

with normal speed. This indicates that slow motion does not simply make processing

easy. The heart rate changes over the slow motion segment provide some clues what

aspects of mental processing slow motion activates. Slow motion elicited slower heart

rates after the mid points of the segment. It seems that it takes time for slow motion to

attain viewers’ cognitive resources. One interpretation may be that slow motion impacts

control processing in viewers. Slow motion may change perception of the currently

occurring events as more important. As slow motion unfolds, audience may also raise

expectation of the next events to be more interesting. Thus, audience put more efforts to

absolve the information over time.

Against prediction, slow motion didn’t seem to affect arousal in viewers. This is

contrary to general belief in TV production that slow motion exaggerates emotion. This is

also contradictory to the findings of previous research (Barnett & Grabe, 2000). The

interpretation can be made in several ways. Notwithstanding general belief, slow motion

simply doesn’t increase arousal in viewers. However, this interpretation should be

postponed due to some limitations of the current study. The mechanism eliciting more

Slow Motion 24

arousing response to slow motion might not rely only on slowed ‘motion’, but also on

lengthened ‘time’. By slow motion, viewers can hold a critical moment of emotion longer

time. For instance, let’s imagine that a basketball player throws a ball to the basket at the

last second just before finishing whistle in a movie. Slow motion lengthens the time the

ball’s bouncing on the ring and makes the audience more intense and curious holding the

emotional state longer time. This study got rid of the lengthened time effects. The

duration of the slow motion segment in both versions was controlled be the same.

Also, slow motion doesn’t occur solely as a structure of television production. It

usually entails proper music or sound effects. In this study, audio information was exactly

the same across the slow motion and normal speed versions. Thus, slow motion couldn’t

have any other structural help to amplify its effects. Considering the aforementioned

treatments for time and audio, it can be said that this study detected only the effects of

motion speed change. The results showed that ‘slowed motion’, only by itself, seems to

impact little on viewers’ arousal. In order to clarify this notion, this study calls for further

research manipulating also time and audio other than just motion.

It was demonstrated the effects of slow motion are different for positive and

negative messages. The result from the zygomatic data showed that slow motion didn’t

affect the emotional experience of positive messages. But, the analysis of the corrugator

data revealed that slow motion did increase the experience of negative emotions

responding to the messages with negative tone. The self report data also showed that slow

motion made positive messages slightly, if any, more likable whereas slow motion

significantly decreased liking scores for negative messages. It seems that slow motion

affected negative messages more considerably than positive messages.

This might be related to explanation of the bivariate approach for underlying

emotional systems. The negative system is fast responding and changing quickly to small

difference in the environment shown by steeper gradient compared to positive system.

Viewers might have felt more close to the situation in watching scenes describing

fighting, hurting, or dying at slow speed. This might have caused avoidance activity in

viewers and led into losing interest.

This study has exploratory characteristic because there has been few attempts to

examine the effects of slow motion in relation with emotional, cognitive and

Slow Motion 25

physiological processing. In this situation, the readers might be suspicious whether the

experiment manipulation (e.g. selection of stimuli) didn’t have any significant flaw. This

is why some of the results for valence and arousal variables were included in the analysis

regardless of hypotheses and research questions. Overall, the results were corresponding

to previous research which examined the effects of valence and arousal. Viewers

allocated significantly more cognitive resources, indexed by heart rates, to negative

messages than to positive messages. And participant remembered positive messages

better than negative messages when arousal was controlled. It, however, should be

cautious to interpret this result. Even though the self report data reported no significant

difference in the arousal levels between the positive and negative messages, the SCL data

showed that the positive messages elicited more physiologically arousing responses in

viewers than the negative messages. Previous research suggested that arousal is a better

index predicting the effects of emotional messages to recall than valence is (Lang et al.,

1995). Thus, the better performance on free recall might have been caused from higher

arousal level of the positive messages. In either way, the free recall results match the

extant findings.

The results of this study have some important implications for TV production

practitioners. It seems that it takes time for slow motion to gain more cognitive resources

in viewers. It implies that, although slow motion is an effective structural feature for

holding cognitive efforts of the viewers, it might not be so influential in short scenes. TV

programs are always limited in duration. Using slow motion enforce TV produces to

make a choice to sacrifice other shots due to its lengthened time. It might be better not to

use slow motion and instead provide more information in some contexts. This study also

implies that slow motion should be used more cautious way for negative messages. Using

slow motion in negative messages may result in unwanted effects to make the viewers

feel less likable losing their interests.

Slow Motion 26

References Armer, A. A. (1986). Directing Television and Film. Belmont, Calif: Wadsworth Pubishing Co. Barnett, B. & Grabe, M. E. (2000). The impact of slow motion video on viewer evaluations of television news stories. News Photographer, 55 (7), 4-7. Bolls, D., Lang, A., & Potter, R. (2001). The effects of message valence and listener arousal on attention, memory, and facial muscular responses to radio advertisements. Communication Research, 28, 627-651.

Bradley, M.M. (1994). Emotional memory: a dimensional analysis. In S. Van Goozen, N.E. Van de Poll, and J.A, Sergeant (eds), Emotions: Essays on Emotion Theory (pp 97-134). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Bradley, M.M. (2000). Emotion and motivation. In J.T. Cacioppo, L.G. Tassinary & G.G. Bernston (Ed.). Handbook of Psychology, 2nd ed. (pp 602-642). London: Cambridge University Press. Bradley, M.M., Greenwald, M.K., Petry, M.C., & Lang, P.J. (1992). Remembering pictures: Pleasure and arousal in memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 379-390. Brown, J. S. (1948). Gradients of approach and avoidance responses and their relation to level of motivation. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 41, 450-465. Cacioppo, J.T., & Bernston, G.G. (1994). Relationship between attitudes and evaluative space: A critical review, with emphasis on the separability of positive and negative substrates. Psychological Bulletin, 1153, 401-423. Cacioppo, J.T., & Gardner, W.L. (1999). Emotion. Annual Reviews: Psychology, 50, 191-214. Cacioppo, J. T., Gardner, W. L., & Berntson, G. G. (1999). The affect system has parallel and integrative processing components: Form follows function. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(5), 839-855. Cacioppo, J. T., Tassinary, L.G., & Berntson, G. G. (2000). Psychophysiological science. In J.T. Cacioppo, L.G. Tassinary, & G.G. Berntson (Eds.) Handbook of psychophysiology (pp. 3-26). New York: Cambridge University Press. Damasio, A.R. (2000). A second chance for emotion. In R.D. Lane & L. Nadel (Ed.), Cognitive neuroscience of emotion (pp. 12-23). New York: Oxford University Press.

Slow Motion 27

Dawson, M. E., Schell, A. E., & Filion, D. L. (2000). The electrodermal system. In J.T. Cacioppo, L.G. Tassinary & G.G. Bernston (Ed.). Handbook of Psychology, 2nd ed. (pp 200-223). London: Cambridge University Press. Detenber, B. H., Simons, R. F., & Bennett, G. G. (1998). Roll ’em!: The effects of picture motion on emotional responses. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 42(1), 113-127. Fox, J.R., Chung, Y., Lee, S. H., Schwartz, N., Leah, H., Zheng, W., Lang, A., & Potter, D. (2002). Effects of Text and Animated Graphics in Television News Stories on Viewer Evaluations, Arousal, Attention, and Memory, Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Miami, FL. Fredrickson, B. L. & Kahneman, D. (1993). Duration neglect in retrospective evaluations of affective episodes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 45-55. Fridlund, A. J., & Izard, C. E. (1983). Electromyographic studies of facial expressions of emotions and patterns of emotions. In J. T. Cacioppo & R. E. Petty (Eds.), Social psychophysiology (pp. 243-286). New York: Guilford. Gantz, W., & Schwartz, N. (2002). Public Service Advertising in a New Media Age: A Report on Television Content. Menlo Par, CA: Kaiser Family Foundation. Geiger, S., & Newhagen, J. (1993). Reveling the black box: Information processing and media effects. Journalism of Communication. Special Issue: The future of the field: Between fragmentation and cohesion, 434, 42-50. Geiger, S., & Reeves, B. (1993). The effects of scene changes and semantic relatedness on attention to television. Communication Research, 20(2), 155-175. Grabe, M.E., Zhou, S., Lang, A., & Bolls, P. (2000). Packaging television news: The effects of tabloid on information processing and evaluative responses. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 44(4), 581-598. Grabe, M.E., Lang, A., & Zhao, X. (2003). New content and form: Implications for memory and audience evaluations. Communication Research, 30 (4), 387-413. Graham, F. K. (1979). Distinguishing among orienting, defense, and startle reflexes. In H. D. Kimmel, E. H. Van Olst, & J. F. Orlebeke (Eds.), The orienting reflex in humans (pp. 137-167). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Heilman, K.H. (2000). Emotional experience: A neurological Model. In R.D. Lane & L. Nadel (Ed.), Cognitive neuroscience of emotion (pp. 328-344). New York: Oxford University Press.

Slow Motion 28

Ito, T. A., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2000). Electrophysiological evidence of implicit and explicit categorization processes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 36(6), 660-676. Ito, T. A., Cacioppo, J. T., & Lang, P. J. (1998). Eliciting affect using the International Affective Picture System: Trajectories through evaluative space. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24(8), 855-879. Ito, T. A., Larsen, J. T., Smith, N. K., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1998). Negative information weighs more heavily on the brain: The negativity bias in evaluative categorizations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(4), 887-900. Kosicki, G. M., & McLeod, J.M. (1990). Learning from political news: Effects of media images and information-processing strategies. In S. Kraus Ed., Mass communication and political information processing (pp. 69-83). Hilldale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Lang, A. (1990). Involuntary attention and physiological arousal evoked by structural features and mild emotion in TV commercials. Communication Research, 17, 275-299. Lang, A. (1991). Emotion, formal features, and memory for televised political advertisements. In F. Biocca (Ed.), Television and political advertising, Vol. I: Psychological Processes (pp. 221-244). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Lang, A. (2000). The limited capacity model of mediated message processing. Journal of Communication, 50(1), 46-70. Lang, A., Bolls, P., Potter, R., & Kawahara, K. (1999). The effects of production pacing and arousing content on the information processing of television messages. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 43, 451-475. Lang, A., Borse, J., Wise, K., & David, P. (2002). Captured by World Wide Web:

Orienting to Structural and Content Features of Computer-Presented Information. Communication Research, 29(3), 215-245. Lang, A. Dhillon, P., and Dong, Q. (1995). Arousal, Emotion, and Memory for television messages. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 38,1-15. Lang, A., & Friestad, M. (1993). Emotion, hemispheric specialization, and visual and verbal memory for television messages. Communication Research, 20(5), 647-670. Lang, A., Geiger, S., Strickwerda, M., & Sumner, J. (1993). The effects of related and unrelated cuts on viewers attention, capacity, and memory. Communication Research, 20,4-29.

Slow Motion 29

Lang, A., Newhagen, J., & Reeves, B. (1996). Negative video as structure: Emotion, attention, capacity, and memory. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 40, 1996, 460-477. Lang, A., Zhou, S., Schwartz, N., Bolls, P., & Potter, R. (2000). The effects of edits on arousal, attention, and memory for television message: When an edit is an edit can an be too much? Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 44(1), 94-109. Lang, P.J. (1984). Cognition in emotion: Concept and action. In C. E.Izard, J. Kagan, & Zajonc (Eds.), Emotions, cognitions, and behavior (pp. 192 –228). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Lang, P.J., Bradley, M.M., & Cuthbert, B.N. (1990). Emotion, attention, and the startle reflex. Psychological Review, 97, 377-398. Lang, P.J., Bradley, M.M., & Cuthbert, B.N. (1997). Motivated attention: Affect, activation and action. In P. J. Lang, R.F. Simons, & M.T. Balaban (Eds.), Attention and Orienting: Sensory and Motivational Processes. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Lang, P.J. Greenwald, M.K., Bradley, M.M., & Hamm, A.O. (1993). Looking at pictures: Evaluativive, facial, visceral, and behavioral responses. Psychophysiology, 30, 261-273. Miller, N. E. (1951). Comments on theoretical models illustrated by the development of a theory of conflict behavior. Journal of Personality, 20, 82-100. Miller, M. E. (1959). Liberalization of the basic S-R concepts: Extensions to conflict behavior, motivation, and social learning. In S. Kock (Ed.), Psychology: A study of a science (pp. 198-292). New York; McGraw-Hill. Miller, N.E. (1961). Some recent studies on conflict behavior and drugs. American Psychologist, 16, 12-24. Millerson, G. (1961). The Technique of Television Production. New York: Hastings House. Morris, J.D. (1995) Observations: SAM the self-assessment manikin: an efficient cross-cultural measurement of emotional response. Journal of Advertising Research, 35(6), 63-68. Newhagen, J., & Reeves, B. (1992). This evening's bad news: Effects of compelling negative television news images on memory. Journal of Communication, 42(2), 25-41. Ohman, A., Esteves, F., Flykt, A., & Sores, J. J. F. (1993). Gateways to consciousness: Emotion, attention, and electrodermal activity. In J. C. Roy, W. Boucsein, D. C. Fowles, & J. H. Gruzelier (Eds.), Progress in Electrodermal Research (pp. 137-157). New York: Plenum.

Slow Motion 30

Potter, R. F. (2000). The effects of voice changes on orienting and immediate cognitive overload in radio listeners. Media Psychology, 2(2), 147-177. Reeves, B., Thorson, E., Rothschild, M., McDonald, D., Hirsch, J., & Goldstein, R. (1985). Attention to television: Intrastimulus effects of movement and scene changes on alpha variation over time. International Journal of Neuroscience, 25, 241-255. Sokolov, E. N., Spinks, J. A., Naatanen, R., & Lyytinen, H. (2002). The Orienting Response in Information Processing. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Stein, N.L.& Trabasso, T. (1992). The organization of emotional experience: creating links among emotion, thinking, langage and intentional action, Cognition Emotion, 6,225-244. Thorson, E., & Lang, A. (1992). The effects of television videographics and lecture familiarity on adult cardiac orienting responses and memory. Communication Research,19(3), 346-369. Thorson, E., Reeves, B., & Schleuder, J. (1985). Message complexity and attention to television. Communication Research, 12, 427-454. Yoon, K., Bolls, P. D., & Lang, A. (1998). The effects of arousal on liking and believability of commercials. Journal of Marketing Communications, 4, 101-104. Zettl, H. (1976). Television Production Handbook, third edition. Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth Publishing Co.

Slow Motion 31

Figure 1. Cardiac response curve of six second shots

69.6

69.8

70

70.2

70.4

70.6

70.8

71

1 2 3 4 5 6Time in Seconds

BPM

Figure 2. Slow motion X Time on Heart Rate

69

69.5

70

70.5

71

71.5

72

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22Time

BPM

Normal Slow

Slow Motion 32

Figure 3. Valence X Time on Heart Rate

68.569

69.570

70.571

71.572

72.573

1 4 7 10 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 2 5 8

Time

BPM

Positive Negative

Figure 4. Slow motion X Time on SCL

-0.6

-0.5

-0.4

-0.3

-0.2

-0.1

0

1 4 7 10 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 2 5 8

Time

Cha

nge

inM

icro

siem

ens

Normal Slow

Slow Motion 33

Figure 5. Slow motion X Time on Corrugators Response

-4

-3-2

-10

12

3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22Times

Chan

gein

Mic

rovo

lts

Normal Slow

Figure 6. Slow motion X Valence on the corrugator data

-2

-1.5

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1

normal slow

Chan

gein

Mic

rovo

lts

positive negative

Slow Motion 34

Figure 7. Slow motion X Valence on SCL

-0.6-0.5-0.4-0.3-0.2-0.1

00.10.2

1 4 7 10 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 2 5 8

Time

SCL

nor-pos nor-neg slow-pos slow-neg

Figure 8. Slow Motion X Valence on ‘Interesting’

4.9

55.1

5.2

5.35.4

5.55.6

5.7

normal slow

Inte

rest

ing

positive negative

Slow Motion 35

Figure 9. Slow Motion X Valence on ‘Liking”

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

5.5

6

normal slow

Liki

ng

positive negative