Open AccessPROVODLJIVOST KOŽE I PROMENE U IZRAŽENOSTI POZITIVNOG I NEGATIVNOG AFEKTA IZAZVANE GLEDANJEM ISEČKA IZ FILMA U ODNOSU NA OPTIMIZAM I PESIMIZAM
Author(s) -
Ana Jovančević,
Miljan Jović,
Nebojša Milićević,
Miodrag Milenović,
Miroslav Komlenić
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
godišnjak studijske grupe za psihologiju
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 1451-1967
DOI - 10.46630/gpsi.17.2020.04
Subject(s) - pessimism , mood , psychology , affect (linguistics) , mood swing , stimulus (psychology) , skin conductance , social psychology , developmental psychology , audiology , medicine , cognitive psychology , theology , communication , philosophy , biomedical engineering
The aim of this paper is to investigate the relation between psychogalvanic reflex and unpleasant affect induced by film, as well as the difference between optimists and pessimists regarding the induction of unpleasant affect. The sample consisted of 42 students from the Faculty of Philosophy in Niš (male, n = 4; female, n =38) aged 18 to 20 (M = 19, SD = 0.54). The following instruments were used: the revised life orientation scale (LOT-R), a brief mood introspection scale (BMIS), and eight-channel polygraph ProComp Infiniti version 4.0. Stimulus was a clip from the film “Sophie’s Choice”. Respondents watched a neutral stimulus before film clip, used as a control measure for recording the basic level of skin conductance of the respondents. The data were analysed by t-test for independent samples (for differences between optimists and pessimists) and t-test for dependent samples (for differences before and after viewing the clip). From the results we can conclude that the mood of optimists, after watching a film clip aimed at induction of unpleasant affect, changes more than the mood of pessimists (p = .000). More precisely, the mood of optimists is more “spoiled” after watching the movie clip, while the mood of pessimists does not change statistically significantly (p = .367). Skin conductance is statistically significant in both optimists (p = .001) and pessimists (p = .005). We can conclude that the induction of affect was different for these two subsamples. In view of this fact, in the subsequent papers researching affect induction, this potentially confunding variable should be taken into account.