Calendar of events

Title: Individual’s Representations of Hedonic and Utilitarian Domains of Consumer Products

Abstract: Consumption behaviour is categorised in many ways, with the most well-established means of differentiation being the dual concepts of hedonic and utilitarian consumption. Hedonic products are designed to bring the consumer enjoyment and pleasure, while utilitarian products are typically purchased to fulfil a specific need or purpose. Whilst the consumer psychology literature is comprehensive regarding predicting hedonic and utilitarian choices, understanding how products are perceived and conceptualised is less well researched, and how these perceptions may differ based on individual differences, even less so.

Our previous studies consistently show that individuals who value shopping for and acquiring consumer products, evaluate hedonic products (e.g., action figures) as less hedonic, and more utilitarian. Further, they rate utilitarian products (e.g., USB drives) as more hedonic and less utilitarian than people who do not care about shopping. These findings suggest that these people derive value from both the hedonic and utilitarian dimensions of consumption more so than people who care little for shopping and material possessions, potentially blurring the lines between these recognised dimensions. To investigate our findings and theory further, we implemented a novel approach to investigate how individuals conceptualise the hedonic, and utilitarian dimensions of consumer products, and how these conceptualisations may vary as a function the propensity to shop for and acquire consumer products.

As an alternative to classic, but time-consuming pairwise similarity judgements, we implemented the Qualtrics Spatial Arrangement Method (Q- SpAM) to collect participants’ visuospatial data regarding perceived similarity between 32 consumer products. Further, we investigated how spatial arrangements (and by association dimensional conceptualisations) differed between groups, based on our individual difference measures, including cognitive styles. Our previous findings, the present study’s methodological approach, and results that support our hypotheses will be summarised during this talk, providing further insight into the ways that consumers perceive and conceptualise common consumer products.

Host: Professor Kim Wade

Title: The Gen-AI Generation: how worried should we be about the democratised ability to generate synthetic content?

Abstract: The advent of generative AI has taken the ability to generate fake content to a new level, and is changing the way we live. In 2018 Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) started to become popular for image synthesis, but the more recent emergence of increasingly powerful diffusion models has since democratised access to content synthesis—allowing almost anyone to create diverse images, audio, and video via simple text prompts. Generative AI can have positive uses but inevitably invites nefarious exploitation, with harms including political disinformation, financial fraud, catfishing, and the creation of sexual digital forgeries (SDF). In this talk I will discuss my research examining: 1) the realism and trustworthiness of faces generated using GAN and diffusion models; and 2) human use of guidance information from (purportedly) either an AI algorithm or a group of human experts when completing simple decision-making tasks. Findings indicate that AI-generated faces are highly realistic and more trustworthy than real ones, and that AI-derived guidance may be uniquely placed to engender biases in humans. I will also discuss plans to develop a system to detect SDF that will be codesigned with the police, charities, and survivors of SDF-related crimes.

Host: Professor Kim Wade

Title: Trust in User-Generated Evidence: Insights from the TRUE Project

Abstract: Information recorded by ordinary citizens on personal devices plays an increasingly important role in accountability processes. Across the world, advances in mobile phone technology and internet access mean that millions of important photographs and videos depicting mass human rights violations have been, and will continue to be, created and shared online. Yet, at the same time, the public is increasingly confronted with examples of deepfakes and synthetic media, which are only likely to become more widespread, advanced, and difficult to detect as the technology progresses. Much of the literature to date has expressed a concern that the rise in deepfakes will lead to mass mistrust in user-generated evidence, and that this in turn will decrease its epistemic value in legal proceedings and human rights accountability processes. This may well be the case, but no study has yet empirically tested that assumption. This lecture outlines some of the key findings to date from the TRUE project, a large multi-disciplinary project, which seeks to address this important evidence gap.

Please follow the attached link above for more information.

Host: Professor Robin Goodwin and Dr Katy Stokes

Title: TBC

Abstract: TBC

Title: TBC

Abstract: TBC

Host: Dr Suzanne Aussems

Title: TBC

Abstract: TBC

Host: Behavioural Science Group (Dr Melina Kunar et al)

Title: What do “Look but Fail to See” errors tell us about awareness and/or consciousness

Abstract: Look but Fail to See (LBFTS) errors are those errors where we miss something that is ‘right in front of our eyes’, even though it is clearly visible and recognizable. Such errors can be amusing, as when we miss a gorilla in an inattentional blindness demo; vexing, as when we miss a typo; and serious, as when a tumor is missed in a CT scan or a weapon is missed at the airport. I will discuss how the capacity limits and operating rules of selective visual attention can give rise to LBFTS errors. LBFTS errors can also inform discussions about the awareness and/or consciousness. They falsify naïve theories that would claim that we are fully aware of everything we are seeing at the current moment, but we knew that wasn’t true. They also falsify or, at least, complexify more interesting theories that equate attention with awareness. Sadly, I will not have a neatly packaged theory of consciousness to offer. Perhaps that will emerge during the question-and-answer period.

Host: Suzanne Aussems

Title: TBC

Abstract: TBC

Host: Professor Kim Wade

Title: Sexual and Gender Minority Identity and Mental Health: Measurement, Impacts, and Solutions

Abstract: Dr. Cramer will provide an overview of his work on lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and diverse (LGBTQ+) identity and health. The session begins with presentation of psychometric assessment work on LGBTQ+ identity and related measures. Emphasis is placed on suicide disparities in U.S. and U.K. contexts. Illustrating a steady stream of community-engaged research, Dr. Cramer then summarizes anti-LGBTQ+ hate crime victimization impact and jury perception studies. Shifting to solutions, Dr. Cramer will review his work with the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs to develop an LGBTQ+ health education program. The talk also features examples of hate crime law policy analyses among transgender adults in the United States. It will conclude with an interactive discussion and exploration of cross-national research collaboration.

Host: Dr Adrian Von Muhlenen

Title: TBC

Abstract: TBC

Title: TBC

Abstract: TBC

Host: Professor NicoleTang and Lauren Wilkinson

Title: TBC

Abstract: TBC

Host: Dr Alice chan

Title: TBC

Abstract: TBC

Host: TBC

Title: TBC

Abstract: TBC

Host: TBC

Title: TBC

Abstract: TBC

Host: Professor Fiona MacCallum

Title: TBC

Abstract: TBC