UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Perceptions of educational slides : implications for multicultural and development education Yas, Arlene Marion 1986

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1986_A8 Y37.pdf [ 3.89MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0054533.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0054533-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0054533-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0054533-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0054533-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0054533-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0054533-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0054533-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0054533.ris

Full Text

PERCEPT IONS OF E D U C A T I O N A L SLIDES: IMPLICATIONS FOR M U L T I C U L T U R A L A N D D E V E L O P M E N T E D U C A T I O N by A R L E N E M A R I O N Y A S A THESIS S U B M I T T E D I N P A R T I A L F U L F I L M E N T OF T H E R E Q U I R E M E N T S FOR T H E D E G R E E OF M A S T E R OF ARTS in T H E F A C U L T Y OF G R A D U A T E STUDIES Department of E d u c a t i o n a l Psychology We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard T H E U N I V E R S I T Y OF BRITISH C O L U M B I A 25 September 1986 © Arlene Marion Yas, 1986 In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t o f the requirements f o r an advanced degree a t the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree t h a t the L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and study. I f u r t h e r agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e copying o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be granted by the head o f my department o r by h i s o r her r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s understood t h a t copying o r p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l not be allowed without my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . Department o f t^ zjuj^ -aW? v\ctI 9&ycr-Uolo^ The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia 1956 Main Mall Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Y3 Date ^ 5 l^/Sfc ABSTRACT The problem investigated was the analysis of connotative meaning of educational materials. Slides of Third World plantation workers were rated on two 15-scale semantic differential forms by a group of Scottish teacher trainees. The scales, generated from general qualitative guidelines found in multicultural and development education literature, were tested for their relevance to the specific experimental materials in a pilot study. The persons depicted in the slides were labelled with different descriptive terms - loaded and neutral. Each subject was exposed to one type of label. The results demonstrated that the persons depicted in the slides were not perceived to be presented in an equal manner. Although both persons received mostly negative ratings, the image of the tea picker was generally rated more positively than that of the plantation worker. The overall photographs were also responded to differentially. The picker slide received more positive responses than did the worker slide. The adjective scales were grouped together into clusters and analysed for treatment and interaction effects. Treatment labels significantly affected at least some of the ratings. In the case of the plantation worker, the loaded label guided the viewers to more positive perceptions, at least on certain scale clusters. The discovery that more intense judgements were less affected by label treatment indicated that viewers' responses were influenced by their own personal attitudes towards the individual depicted as well as by the manner in which the individual was presented. The relationship between person perception and slide evaluation ii was not found to be statistically significant. More indepth research is required to determine the actual behaviour resulting from the attitudes revealed in the present type of study. Would teachers or teacher trainees actually use these slides in the classroom environment? And would they refer to the individuals depicted in the derogatory fashion implied by some of the judgements expressed? And finally, what effects would such negative teacher attitudes have on their pupils? iii TABLE OF CONTENTS A B S T R A C T ii LIST OF T A B L E S vi LIST OF F I G U R E S vii A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S viii I. INTRODUCTION 1 A . Background 1 B. Purpose of the study 5 C. Definition of Terms 7 II. L I T E R A T U R E R E V I E W 10 A . Bias and visual literacy 10 B. The measurement of meaning 12 1. Qualitative Measures 13 2. Quantitative Measures 14 3. The semantic differential as a measuring instrument 16 a. Content 16 b. Amount of material 18 c. Scale divisions 18 d. The form of the test 19 e. Administration 20 f. Scoring procedure 21 g. Analysis 21 h. Stability 22 i. Utility 22 III. M E T H O D O L O G Y 25 A . Measuring instrument 25 1. The semantic differential technique 25 2. Relationship to the study 26 3. Construction of the semantic differential tests 27 a. Concepts 27 b. Scales 28 c. Form of the test 30 d. Validity and reliability 31 B. Population and sampling techniques 32 1. Population 32 2. Sample 33 C. Design of the experiment 34 1. Overall design 34 2. Design variables 36 a. Independent variables 36 b. Dependent variables 36 D. Procedures 37 1. Data collection 37 iv 2. Scoring procedures 38 IV. R E S U L T S 39 A . Data analysis 39 B. Findings 40 V . DISCUSSION 60 A . Summary 60 B. Conclusions 62 C. Limitations of the study 65 D. Implications and recommendations 68 B I B L I O G R A P H Y 73 A P P E N D I X A 78 A P P E N D I X B 86 A P P E N D I X C 90 A P P E N D I X D 93 A P P E N D I X E 96 A P P E N D I X F 98 v LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Adjective pairs: person presentation 28 Table 2. Adjective pairs: slide evaluation 29 Table 3. Person presentation clusters 45 Table 4. Slide evaluation clusters 46 Table 5. Cluster scores: person presentation 47 Table 6. Cluster scores: slide evaluation 48 Table 7. A N O V for repeated measures: person presentation 49 Table 8. A N O V for repeated measures: slide evaluation 50 vi LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Schematic representation of experimental design 35 Figure 2. Semantic profile of mean responses to persons depicted in slides 42 Figure 3. Semantic profile of mean responses to slides 43 Figure 4. Person effect 52 Figure 5. Cluster effect: person presentation 53 Figure 6. Person by treatment interaction 54 Figure 7. Person by cluster interaction 55 Figure 8. Slide effect 57 Figure 9. Cluster Effect: slide evaluation 58 vii LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Adjective pairs: person presentation 28 Table 2. Adjective pairs: slide evaluation 29 Table 3. Person presentation clusters 45 Table 4. Slide evaluation clusters 46 Table 5. Cluster scores: person presentation 47 Table 6. Cluster scores: slide evaluation 48 Table 7. A N O V for repeated measures: person presentation 49 Table 8. A N O V for repeated measures: slide evaluation 50 vi LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Schematic representation of experimental design 35 Figure 2. Semantic profile of mean responses to persons depicted in slides 42 Figure 3. Semantic profile of mean responses to slides 43 Figure 4. Person effect 52 Figure 5. Cluster effect: person presentation 53 Figure 6. Person by treatment interaction 54 Figure 7. Person by cluster interaction 55 Figure 8. Slide effect 57 Figure 9. Cluster Effect: slide evaluation 58 vii A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S Many people have contributed to the final success of this study. Foremost are the members of my thesis committee, Dr. Vincent D'Oyley, Dr. Lome Koroluk, and Dr. Robert Conry, to whom I would like to express my gratitude for their most invaluable assistance and continuing interest. I would also like to thank all those people at Moray House College of Education who helped me out when I was in Edinburgh - Livingston for his advice, the students for their participation in the experiment, and Mike Quickfall for the loan of the micro-computer equipment. Finally, I would like Malcolm and my parents to know how much I appreciated their constant support and encouragement throughout the long years of my studies. viii I. I N T R O D U C T I O N A . B A C K G R O U N D The current emphasis on multicultural and development education has given rise to the production of a diversity of visual resource materials designed to support curricular activities which reflect, and prepare students to live in, a global community (McClean, 1985). Quite often, however, these materials are developed on a purely intuitive basis. If they are to be effective, their production and use must be based both on educational needs and on the information emerging from current research, especially that in the field of communications and educational technology. Careful preparation and analysis of visual messages are required to further the understanding of the relationships existing between the intended meaning, the message sent, and the actual meaning received by a particular audience (Fleming & Levie, 1978; Kemp, 1980; Sikora, 1981; Thompson, 1969). In 1979, the Scottish Committee on Environmental Studies issued curricular guidelines recommending the emphasis of four key concepts to be covered in primary school: "stability and change", "cause and consequence", "similarity and difference", and "interdependence". The Committee stressed the importance of incorporating these concepts into an overall curricular approach which would provide scope for multicultural and development education as well as for the more traditional disciplines, such as mathematics, geography, and biology. Concepts could be introduced within the constructs of a "general topic", that is, one which involves elements of more than one subject and which serves to 1 INTRODUCTION / 2 advance the pupil's knowledge and skills in several fields (Her Majesty's Inspector of Schools, 1984). In developing a project of this type, the class should concentrate on one or two concepts which arise naturally from, and which encapsulate the general principles inherent in, the topic under consideration. The identification of these key concepts will help the teacher set specific educational objectives and brings direction and coherence to the learning experience. "Environmental studies approach" and "multicultural and development education" are defined below. With these factors in mind, a multi-media instructional package was developed in 1985 by this author as a vehicle for multicultural and development education in the Lothian Region primary schools. In preparation, a needs assessment was undertaken involving an advisor for the regional school system and several head teachers and class teachers from various Edinburgh schools. Two major considerations emerged from these discussions: a desire for pupils to develop an awareness of human interrelations on a global scale, and the necessity of providing for direct, hands-on experiences. The Royal Botanic Gardens, Edinburgh was identified as the most accessible centre of interest in the Lothian area capable of integrating these apparently divergent concerns. Spending time inside the plant houses located at the Gardens would enable school children to physically experience the habitats of tropical and sub-tropical regions of the world, thus bringing them closer to the people who reside in these areas. In this manner, concepts such as "interdependence", as existing between peoples of different countries, ethnic groups, and religions, could INTRODUCTION / 3 be introduced and elaborated within an obvious, tangible context. Inside the tropical and sub-tropical planthouses may be found numerous foreign economic plants (eg., banana, rice, coffee, citrus) well known to most Scottish children. The individual plants could be used as familiar focal points from which would spring different projects leading to an understanding of the less familiar. Follow-up classroom projects using plant specimens, artifacts and visual materials could then be used to explore the lives of these people and to promote an understanding of the direct and indirect interrelationships existing between Britain and many Third World countries. These projects would also provide an opportunity to delve into such concepts as "similarity and difference" (eg., comparing life on farms in Britain with life on tropical plantations), "cause and consequence" (eg., relating past colonisations to present day migration patterns, or relating climate to lifestyles) and "stabilits' and change" (eg., analysing conflicts between environmental changes and quality of life). The Botanic Gardens instructional package consists of visual materials, background information, and project suggestions for use before, during, and after the visit. It was designed as a resource base which teachers and pupils can supplement and enrich with topics reflecting their own personal needs and interests along with current issues. Included in the package are slides and posters depicting tropical and sub-tropical plantations and the people responsible for the production of many of the necessities and luxuries of life upon which Western people have come to depend. The slides were selected from the Botanic Gardens general slide collection, while the posters were from commercial companies such as Rowntree and Cadbury. Realistic visual materials were included because viewing denotative INTRODUCTION / 4 images is the closest most Scottish children will come to experiencing lifestyles other than their own. As well as depicting scenes inaccessible due to distance, slides and posters can also be used as to arouse interest in a topic, to focus attention on details, and to revise and reinforce new skills and concepts. The specific materials were chosen because a), they highlight the close connections that exist between people living in Britain and in Third World countries, b), they can be used to emphasize the concept "interdependence" as well as to illustrate the other major concepts mentioned above, and c), they are representative of the educational slides currently used to complement multicultural and development education projects in British primary schools. Those were the criteria initially used in selecting the materials, but what will these visual aids actually communicate to their intended audiences? How will the images of the Third World people be perceived? The slides, as well as the posters, are accompanied by verbal descriptions. This led to another issue — the labels selected for the persons depicted. A title chosen for purely denotative purposes may have unpredicted connotative effects on a particular audience (Barthes, 1977; Hall , 1973). The emphasis on fragments of a person's individuality - nationality, sex, religion -- can influence perceptions in a direction dependent on the particular viewer's personal background and may thereby induce a bias, positive or negative, towards the individual so labelled. It cannot be assumed that the meaning received will necessarily be equivalent to that intended (Baggaley & Duck, 1976). In a previous study (Yas, 1986), a semantic differential technique was used to INTRODUCTION / 5 study and evaluate the posters included in the learning package. The present study deals exclusively with the slide content of the package. B. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY The needs assessment provided a framework for the contents of the educational package but could not predict the meanings that would be created when the viewers interacted with the materials included. Current educational research in visual literacy stresses the impact of the connotative effects of words on the pictures they accompany (Snider, 1960). Words can direct the reader towards one of many interpretations of the visual image. Considering these factors, an experiment was designed to investigate whether a label loaded with a socioethnographic term would guide viewers towards more biased perceptions of the individual depicted in an educational slide than would a neutral label, and whether or not the loaded label would colour the assessments given to the slide itself. An analytic instrument, such as the semantic differential technique, may furnish some of the criteria required by educators to assess the overt and covert messages that they and their pupils receive from these educational materials. This would help educators make informed decisions in the development, selection, and use of instructional materials, and may provide specific tools with which to raise teachers' and students' awareness of their own personal biases. The general purpose of this study is to measure the perceptions that teacher 0 INTRODUCTION / 6 trainees have of visual educational material commonly used in multicultural and development education projects, and to study some of the factors influencing these perceptions. The specific objectives are: 1. to use the semantic differential technique to quantify the direction and intensity of teacher trainees' reactions towards slides depicting Third World plantation workers, 2. to test the hypothesis that loaded labels will affect connotative responses to the labelled individuals depicted in a photographic slide and to the slide as a whole, and 3. to study the relationship between the perceptions teacher trainees have of the individual depicted and the assessments given to the slide as a whole. On a purely experimental basis, teacher trainees were selected as an appropriate population because they have the required familiarity with the type of materials presented. From a more profound, educational perspective, however, a single teacher's attitudes towards people from different ethnic, racial, or religious backgrounds can have a strong influence on the entire classroom environment. It is therefore essential that teachers be able to critically examine and assess not only visual materials for biases and stereotyping (Pratt, 1972; Saunders, 1982) but their own personal viewpoints as well (Boudreau, 1981; Overing, 1977). In order to ensure that future teachers attain these goals, the teaching college must provide relevant instruction. The present type of study may contribute to these teacher training programmes by revealing educational needs and suggesting INTRODUCTION / 7 curricular strategies whereby trainees would acquire or improve on the skills necessary for effective multicultural and development education. C. DEFINITION OF TERMS Development education, as a part of the primary school curriculum in Britain, is an attempt to help children understand international issues and become aware of their own roles as global citizens. Development education must be linked to issues closely related to children's lives (Costa Rica). For example, the interdependence between the industrialized countries and the so-called developing countries can be emphasized through the study of world economics and the fluctuations of familiar products, such as sugar and cocoa, on the world market (Clark, 1979). Development education in the Western World is essentially education about development. It is basically a question of content ~ providing information on development issues - and of methodology - creating a school atmosphere that promotes an open-minded stance towards the problems of the contemporary world. In contrast to this curricular strategy, development education in the Third World is education for development. Students are not only made cognizant of existing situations, but are also trained in the knowledge and techniques required to effectively change and improve these situations (Olivera, 1977). Environmental studies is a multidisciplinary approach to education in which INTRODUCTION / 8 learning springs from the concrete experience of a local environment, or centre of interest, and proceeds to the understanding of other, unfamiliar environments. An important aspect is to make the link between first-hand observation and vicarious experience apparent to the child. Relevant skills, such as observing, measuring, and recording, and concepts, such as interdependence, and cause and consequence, are developed from the project activities which evolve naturally from the focal point (HM Inspector of Schools, 1984; Regional Consultative Committee on Primary Education, 1977). Multicultural education is not a subject or distinct topic, but a matter of curriculum improvement and enrichment. The main goal is to help prepare children to live in a multicultural society comprised of different lifestyles, religions, languages, and values. Through individual and class projects, pupils are encouraged to develop a knowledge and positive awareness of different cultures and to understand the various aspects and effects of prejudice and racism, whether their own, or that of others. The educative processes used should incorporate methods from a variety of cultures. Multicultural education can be most easily implemented through an environmental studies programme where topic approaches (i.e., multidisciplinary experiences embracing many subjects, skills and concepts) readily permit the introduction of multicultural material into all aspects of the curriculum (McClean, 1984). In Scotland most children grow up in a fairly homogeneous society. Multicultural education is therefore generalfy treated in an indirect, descriptive manner, focussing mainly on information about a multicultural world (Ashrif, 1984) In INTRODUCTION / 9 Canada, on the other hand, a multicultural curriculum is based on the reality of teaching and learning within an immediate multicultural environment (Shapson & D'Oyley, 1984). II. L I T E R A T U R E REV IEW A. BIAS A N D V I SUAL L I T E R A C Y Stereotyping and bias are common problems in our society, and are often reflected in the verbal content and illustrations of educational materials (Council on Interracial Books for Children, 1980; Hornburger, 1977). It is acknowledged that children's values, beliefs, and behaviour are shaped, to a certain extent, through their exposure to the media, both the mass media, and educational media. In order to counteract the effect of negative or misleading information, educators must provide students with a wide variety of materials and explore with them the different viewpoints expressed therein (Saunders, 1982; Zimet, 1976). Many educators believe it is important that school resources not contain any material objectionable on racist, ethnic, or religious grounds. Others consider this kind of action to be censorship and feel that negative elements should be pointed out and discussed with students so as to increase their awareness of the different forms that prejudice, whether verbal or pictorial, may take (Barty & Hashmi, 1981; Hornburger, 1977). One of the most important aspects of the presence of visual images in the classroom situation is whether the viewer reacts with critical understanding or with a programmed response. Current educational thought holds that a person is only partially literate if functioning on a programmed level (Sikora, 1981). This conviction has led to the introduction of visual literacy curriculums into the educational system in an attempt to help teachers and students interpret and 10 L I T E R A T U R E R E V I E W / 11 evaluate visual messages (Dake, 1982; Heinich, Molenda, & Russell, 1982). Visual media are rarely without verbal accompaniment, however. Therefore, the effect of the verbal language on the content conveyed by the picture must also be considered (Snider, 1960). Emerging from the interaction between the individual reader and the concrete, physical aspects of the visual are a variety of possible connotative responses. Titles and captions can narrow this range of meaning by guiding the reader towards certain meanings and closing off potential others (Barthes, 1977). Snider (1960) described several studies where experimental results have revealed labelling effects. For example, it was found that subjects tend to look for characteristics compatible with the label applied to a visual design, sometimes only attending to that one characteristic, and that subjects perceive most readilj' that which they can name most easily. Apparently, labels make the features of the objective world stand out more and influence perception in the direction of the words. Barthes (1977) used the term "anchorage" to describe the function of words used as captions for photographs. Words help anchor, or "fix" the possible choices of signifiers in such a way as to direct and limit responses to the visual signified. At the first order, or denotative level, of meaning, the function of both the image and the words is that of objective denomination -- the picture denotes or presents a particular image while the words help locate the photograph within the viewer's experience of the world. In identifying the denoted object, words act as "realism operators" for the image by specifying the actual bit of the real L I T E R A T U R E R E V I E W / 12 world to which it refers, thereby increasing its believability. A t this level of meaning, words are static and only significant in connection with their photograph (Snider, 1960). A t the second order of meaning, both the image and the accompanying words have connotative meanings (Barthes, 1977) and relate to one another in a dynamic manner. The verbal-visual complex meets with the system of values, feelings, and attitudes of the receiver's culture (Fiske, 1979) and creates a personal message that is greater than the sum of the individual picture-word parts. The connotations associated with the image provide a potentially greater range of meaning than the denotative signifiers. Therefore, if an author has a particular message to convey, words can be used to direct our reading by telling us how the image should be read and often why a photograph was taken. That is, the words can be used to purposefully direct us towards a "preferred reading" of the image by guiding us towards one meaning while closing off other meanings (Barthes, 1977; Hall , 1973; Snider, 1960). This phenomenon is not always intended, however. It often occurs inadvertently or unconsciously on the author's part (Baggaley & Duck, 1976). B . T H E M E A S U R E M E N T O F M E A N I N G Multicultural and development education literatures focusses on two major approaches to the analysis of racial and ethnic bias in educational materials: qualitative and quantitative measurement techniques. These methods have been applied conjointly in certain studies, but are most commonly found as separate procedures (Pratt, 1972; Saunders, 1982). L I T E R A T U R E R E V I E W / 13 1. Qualitative Measures In an attempt to ensure that any storybook involving Third World people, first, recognizes their group experiences, and second, treats these experiences with honesty, the Council on Interracial Books for Children (1980) has suggested that "words and art" should be examined qualitatively using categories such as, "Is the material racist, non-racist, or anti-racist?" With respect to the analysis of racial stereotyping in children's books, numerous sets of checklists and guidelines have been developed, including such criteria as: "Look for inaccuracies and inappropriateness in the descriptions of the life styles of minorities" (Saunders, 1982); "Look carefully at illustrations: do they correctly represent the ethnic group depicted?" (World Council of Churches, 1978); and "Beware of material which is out of date" (Clark, 1979). Given sufficient time and effort, these kinds of guidelines can succeed in making educators aware of general racial and ethnic biases, and may generate deep insights into a specific problem. Most often, however, the criteria are effectively too vague and time-consuming for a busy teacher to put into practice. And despite the large degree of agreement on the criteria that have been assembled, when these analyses are undertaken the results are highly subjective and therefore difficult to discuss, summarize, and compare. The use of purely qualitative methods may miss important themes relevant to other situations (Saunders, 1982). L I T E R A T U R E REVIEW / 14 The results of analyses must be cumulative and amenable to quantitative analysis so that both the texts, and the methods used for their analyses can be properly evaluated. Qualitative techniques alone cannot provide educators with the systematic procedures required to assist them in studying and evaluating instructional materials (Pratt, 1972; Saunders, 1982). 2. Quantitative Measures Empirical processes allow for the categorization of data and for direct comparisons through simple numerical and statistical procedures. Quantitative research is carried out with respect to explicit rules and therefore can remove much of the subjectivity and randomness inherent in purely qualitative approaches (Fiske, 1982; Pratt, 1972; Saunders, 1982). Content analysis, for example, was designed to produce an objective, measurable account of the denotative content (the concrete meaning) of messages. Units relevant to a particular study are identified, and then counted in the selected communication system. The chosen units can be television roles, words in a text, or any other readily identifiable attribute of a message occurring frequently enough for the application of statistical analysis (Fiske, 1982). Content analysis focuses on denotative meaning, but the emerging patterns often reveal connotative values and attitudes (the implied meaning). For example, the results of numerous television studies reported by Fiske (1982) demonstrated that young, white, middle-class males were over-represented. This led to the proposition that the frequency of portrayal connotes a high value in the social value system, at least in Britain and the United States. L I T E R A T U R E R E V I E W / 15 Evaluation coefficient analysis is another form of content analysis and was developed in order to measure racial or ethnic bias in textbooks (Pratt, 1972; Saunders, 1982). The "favourability" or "unfavourability" of evaluative terms are calculated, and texts are then examined for the frequency of use of these terms. Scores descriptive of the degree of bias are assigned to the texts on the basis of these frequencies. History and social studies textbooks have been the main focus of content analysis. Although these areas may be of extreme importance, Bourke (1981) contends that illustrations make a more immediate and lasting impact on young children than do content selections and language usage. A more direct route to the analysis of the connotative meaning, which provides for both visual and verbal material, is via the use of semantic differential tests. This technique was developed in the late 1950's (Osgood, Suci, & Tannenbaum, 1965) as a systematic attempt to measure meaning quantitatively. A n individual's feelings, attitudes, and emotions held towards a verbal concept, such as "mother", "Italian", or "doctor", or towards some kind of visual image are expressed as ratings along a series of bipolar-adjectival scales such as, "good/bad", or "weak/strong". Each individual scale is made up of a number of gradations between an adjective and its opposite. Subjects are asked to consider the stimulus in terms of the adjective pairs on the form and to check a point on each scale to indicate the direction and intensity of their judgements. The closer the mark is placed to one of the polar terms, the more applicable the subject considers the particular term to the stimulus. The mid-point is a neutral point, to be marked if the subject feels undecided or neutral towards the concept with respect to a specific scale, or feels that either of the polar terms could be equally applied to L I T E R A T U R E R E V I E W / 16 the concept. A numerical value is assigned to each response so that the results can be compared statistically across different concepts or across different audience or treatment variables. The responses of an individual or of a group to a concept can be represented diagrammatically on a semantic graph, or "profile", of the ratings given on the set of scales provided (Baggaley & Duck, 1976; Osgood et al., 1965; Warr & Knapper, 1968). 3. The semantic differential as a measuring instrument a. Content The semantic differential technique is easily adapted to the requirements of a specific study. The concepts and scales chosen depend only on the purposes of the particular research problem, and as alternate verbal responses are elicited from, not emitted by the subjects, encoding fluency as a variable is eliminated. As long as the terms used for the scales are appropriate to the volcabulary level of the respondants, a semantic differential can be administered across a wide range of subjects (Osgood et al., 1965). i) Concept selection A stimulus to which a subject is asked to respond on bipolar adjective scales is referred to as a "concept". The nature of the research problem defines the specific subject matter and form (for example, pictorial, or verbal format) of the concepts chosen for rating. The only criteria given are that the relevant concepts of a given area should be sampled in order to get a representative selection, and that the concepts selected should be familiar to the subjects as unfamiliar L I T E R A T U R E R E V I E W / 17 concepts may produce misleading neutral responses (Osgood et al., 1965). ii) Scale selection The sample of descriptive polar terms should be representative of the ways meaningful judgements can vary with respect to the chosen concepts, yet small enough to be efficient in practice. Osgood et al. (1965) used Roget's "Thesaurus" as a source of descriptive terms. In other studies, scales were derived from the free associations of subjects observing the materials presented. For example, Baggaley and Duck (1976) generated adjective values by showing the stimulus materials, two versions of a video tape, to a pilot sample of viewers who were requested to discuss their subjective reponses to the presented materials. The ensuing discussion was recorded and analysed to locate the most commonly occurring adjectives. These formed the basis of the value scales used in the final analysis of the video tapes. In a study outlined by Lundeen (1969), scales were derived from descriptive material in planning and design literature. The pairing of a particular scale with a particular concept is described as one "item". Each subject's judgment of an item provides one bit of information. Irrelevant concept-scale pairing should be avoided as it tends to produce a neutral response, thereby reducing the amount of information gained with a given number of items (Osgood et al., 1965). In some studies, however, irrelevant scales were deliberately included to help mask the true purpose of the test and to show whether the experimental variables would affect assessments indiscriminantly or more specifically (Baggaley & Duck, 1976). L I T E R A T U R E R E V I E W / 18 6. Amount of material The amount of material presented, that is, the number of items (number of concepts times number of scales) used in the differential, can be adjusted to the limitations of the particular study, such as the amount of time that can be demanded of the subjects. The slowest college student can make judgments at the rate of at least 10 items per minute. Most subjects can do about 20 items per minute once they get going. This means that even in a short period of time a large amount of information can be collected per unit time per subject (Osgood et al., 1965; Warr & Knapper, 1968). c. Scale divisions The scale inserted between each pair of terms increases the sensitivity of the semantic differential as a measuring instrument by adding the dimension of degree. Subjects can indicate the intensity as well as the direction of each judgment (Osgood et al., 1965). Over a large number of experiments and subjects, Osgood et al. (1965) found that the use of seven scale alternatives was most suitable for semantic differential tests. A l l seven alternatives were used with approximately equal frequencies. Fewer divisions appeared to irritate respondents, and in a series of experiments using nine alternatives an unsatisfactory distribution of responses resulted (Osgood et al., 1965). The successful use of nine alternatives has been cited in the study of person perceptions (Warr & Knapper, 1968), however, the seven-point scale system has been most commonly used in research involving visual stimuli (Baggaley, 1980; Baggaley & Duck, 1976; Farish, 1982; Leimkuhler & Ziegler, 1978). L I T E R A T U R E R E V I E W / 19 Apart from mentioning that the middle alternative is neutral, verbal labels are not used to describe the positions on the scales (Baggaley, 1980; Baggaley & Duck, 1976; Leimkuhler & Ziegler, 1978; Osgood et al., 1965; Warr and Knapper, 1968). When explicit verbal labels were attached to each possible response, for example, "extremely" for position "1" or "7", or "slightly" for position "3" or "5", it was discovered that subjects made more extreme responses thus giving a poor distribution of responses. d. The form of the test A semantic differential test is typically made up of a set of bipolar adjective scales listed down a page; in this way, judgements are elicited in succession (Osgood et al., 1965). A t the top of the list, the stimulus concept to be differentiated, or described, may be identified verbally (Osgood et al., 1965), and the scale positions may be labelled numerically (Baggaley & Duck, 1976; Farish, 1982). In order to prevent the formation of position preference, the positive and negative terms of an adjective pair are usually randomly assigned to either side of the scales. That is, either extreme may express the positive or negative of a scale (Baggaley & Duck, 1976; Osgood et al., 1965). L I T E R A T U R E R E V I E W / 20 e. Administration The preparation of a semantic differential test is a rapid and uncomplicated task. Identical lists of scales are used for related concepts, thus making the forms easy to duplicate. As only one sheet of paper is necessary per concept, standardized sheets are used with the various concept names added to the top as desired. Little time is required for instructions, practice, and the test itself. The rapid rate of response makes it an attractive instrument for both the subject and the administrator, though some suspicions about the reliability and validity of the measures thus obtained have been voiced. However, it has been demonstrated that the speed at which the subject works does not affect the stability of the differential responses. Warr & Knapper (1968) described a study where the stability coefficients from two groups were compared. One group had been instructed to respond rapidly, giving their first impressions, whereas the other group had been requested to work slowly and carefully through the scales. The results showed no significant differences between the responses of the two groups, though the responses of the first group were somewhat more stable. Semantic differential forms can be administered to many subjects at once or at different times under the same conditions. It is a relatively simple matter to control experimental conditions as all subjects within a treatment get identical copies of the form. L I T E R A T U R E R E V I E W / 21 f. Scoring procedure The raw data obtained with the semantic differential is a collection of checkmarks made against bipolar scales commonly made up of seven divisions. A number can be attached to each of the positions on these scales, either initially, on the form itself at the top of the list of scales, or after the test is administered. A reader's score on an item is the digit corresponding to the position checked. If the scales have been alternated in polarity direction, the scores must be adjusted before any statistical analysis can be performed on the final data (Baggaley & Duck, 1976; Osgood et al., 1965; Warr & Knapper, 1968). g. Analysis Responses given on the semantic differential forms are easy to score and code. The data is then amenable to statistical analysis such as t tests and factor analysis or other cluster analyses. Individual or group results can be represented visually on semantic profiles. This type of rapid visual reference may prove very useful for practical, educational purposes. The means of arriving at the results, from the collection of check-marks on scales, are completely objective and the operations of measurement can be made explicit so that they can be replicated. Two investigators given the same collection of check-marks and following the same rules will end up with the same analysis of the concepts. The semantic differential procedures thus eliminate the idiosyncracies of the experimenter. L I T E R A T U R E R E V I E W / 22 h. Stability The semantic differential technique is known for its reliabilit}' (Baggaley & Duck, 1976; Osgood et al., 1965). Its effectiveness does not appear to be influenced by external factors such as subject fatigue within a single application. In addition, high test-re test reliability coefficiants demonstrate that subjects respond consistently in successive applications of a specific semantic differential instrument. The question of semantic differential validity, on the other hand, is not quite so starightforward (Emmert & Brooks, 1970). As an absolute or complete measure of meaning the value of this technique must be examined closely. A l l possible attitudes towards a stimulus concept cannot be accounted for within the confines of one set of adjectival scales. The scale procedure can only be considered valid as an index of selected internal states of the population tested, and only for those scales deemed relevant to the concepts judged. i. Utility Finally, the semantic differential technique has proven to be highly effective in the analysis of both verbal and visual concepts. In numerous linguistic (Osgood et al., 1965) and person perception studies (Warr & Knapper, 1968), verbal concepts have been used to investigate dimensions of perception and the factors influencing these dimensions. More recently, semantic differential studies have been undertaken in an increasing number of different fields to analyse connotative responses to visual stimuli. In a series of television studies, (Baggaley, 1980; Baggaley & Duck, 1976) semantic L I T E R A T U R E R E V I E W / 23 differentials were used to investigate the effect of changing simple visual variables. For example, a television news presenter was rated differently when addressing the camera directly as compared to when shown in three-quarter profile. In another media study, a semantic differential was used to record attitudes towards police viewed in the original, uncaptioned photograph and as it appeared on the front page of a daily newspaper (Farish, 1982). In these studies, the mean ratings given on certain scales were modified by the experimental context. Semantic profiles created from the data allowed for the rapid visual examination of the ratings given under the different treatment conditions. A poster depicting Third World plantation workers was assessed using several semantic differential tests. This method of indepth analysis changed certain initial perceptions of the poster and increased the subjects' abilities to discuss bias in similar materials (Yas, 1986). During a pretest, group discussion on posters used in multicultural education the subjects, teacher trainers, were vague in their anah/ses and reached no specific conclusions about the materials. The few opinions that were voiced about the poster analysed again under experimental conditions were neutral or even positive. These same subjects gave this poster numerous and obviously negative ratings on the semantic differential scales provided later. During the posttest discussion, the subjects contributed numerous comments and suggestions about the poster tested and about visual educational materials in general. This appears to be a common phenomenon. Osgood et al. (1965) described how individuals asked directly what something meant to them often found it difficult to spontaneously encode meanings. But when L I T E R A T U R E R E V I E W / 24 semantic differentials were provided, these individuals were able to express a large number of judgements. Semantic differential scales used in a medical study demonstrated that diagnostic labels significantly affected the perceptions of unfamiliar individuals viewed in slides (Leimkuhler & Zeigler, 1978). Osgood et al. (1965) described an experiment where the captions selected altered the judgments about the accompanying photograph on certain semantic scales. For example, the word "Reunion" when included in the caption loaded meaning towards the positive end of the "happy/sad" scale, while "Parting" loaded meaning towards the negative end of this scale. The effect of the caption generalized to the other scales within the same dimension so that judgments were modified overall. Oppenheim (1970) described a general technique useful for the elicitation of the stereotypic effects of labels. Subjects are shown a series of photographs of faces and asked to complete a set of rating scales (such as semantic differential scales) dealing with personal characteristics. A t a later date, the same photographs are shown to the same subjects but this time with a label attached (such as the name of an ethnic group), and are mixed in with other photographs in order to disguise the experimental materials. III. METHODOLOGY A. MEASURING INSTRUMENT 1. The semantic differential technique The measuring instrument chosen for this study is a procedure commonly used to measure connotative responses to people or objects. The semantic differential technique provides a relatively simple yet effective procedure for the rating of stimulus materials: the values or judgements to be investigated are identified and expressed as polar terms on gradated scales; the reactions to the stimulus are recorded on each of these scales; and the results are collected and analysed statistically (Fiske, 1982; Osgood et al., 1965 Warr and Knapper, 1968). The technique is highly generalisable and easify adapted to the specific requirements of a particular study. It has been used in the analysis of many different kinds of materials, both verbal and pictorial, to provide a quantitative index of meaning. The gradated adjective scales increase the instrument's sensitivity by allowing for the measurement of degree as well as direction of response. The rating forms themselves are easy to administer and take only a few minutes for subjects to complete. The analysis of raw data is uncomplicated and the methods of arriving at the final results are objective. 25 2. Relationship to the study METHODOLOGY / 26 Stereotypes often reflect an attitude, whether favorable or unfavorable. Therefore, with respect to the problem of obtaining and studying stereotypes, almost any technique of attitude measurement can be usefully employed (Oppenheim, 1970). The review of the literature indicates that the semantic differential approach could be used in combining qualitative criteria developed from multicultural and development education research with the objectivity of semantic differential scales to produce a direct method for eliciting and evaluating reactions to instructional materials. In the present study a semantic differential instrument was designed to quantitatively measure teacher trainees' perceptions of selected visual instructional materials and some of the factors contributing to and affecting these perceptions. The specific function of the instrument is: 1. to measure the directionality and intensity of responses to educational slides depicting Third World plantation workers, 2. to test the hypotheses that treatment labels will affect the responses to i), the persons depicted in the slides, and ii), each slide as a whole, and 3. to measure the correlations between (i) and (ii) above. M E T H O D O L O G Y / 27 3. Construction of the semantic differential tests a. Concepts Two colour slides of plantation workers in Third World countries (see Appendix F) were chosen from a slide set included in the instructional package described above (Yas, 1985). These materials were specifically selected for analysis being highly representative of the kind of slides circulated in Scottish primary schools for use in multicultural and development education projects. The subject matter of this type of slide can therefore safely be assumed to be familiar to the experimental population, that is, Scottish teacher trainees enrolled in Environmental Studies courses. One slide depicted a Nigerian man harvesting bananas, the other slide a Sri Lankan woman harvesting tea. Each of these slides was used as the source of two visual concepts. The first concept to be rated for each slide was the person depicted in the photograph with respect to the manner in which she or he was presented. The second concept was the slide as a whole. The persons depicted in the stimulus slides were each labelled in a manner similar to the labelling commonly found in commercial slide/booklet sets used in multicultural and development education. Two dummy slides of plantation workers were included in the capacity of embedding material. These materials helped mask the actual purpose of the test by preventing an obvious, direct comparison between the two experimental slides. The responses to the embedding slides were not analysed. M E T H O D O L O G Y / 28 b. Scales In a pilot stud}7, the adjective terms to be used for this study were derived from multicultural and development education literature on the analysis of racist, ethnic, and sexist bias in educational materials (see Tables 1 and 2). [See Appendix A for pilot study details.] Table 1 Adjective Pairs: Person Presentation Positive term Negative term superior inferior independent dependent individualistic* stereotypic* active* passive* powerful powerless advanced primitive knowledgeable ignorant expert inexpert dominant subordinate s k i l f u l unskilled free subjugated strong* weak* responsible irresponsible contented* discontented* successful unsuccessful *Embedding scales M E T H O D O L O G Y / 29 Table 2 Adjective Pairs: Slide Evaluation P o s i t i v e term Negative term accurate inaccurate appropriate inappropriate non-stereotyping stereotyping progressive t r a d i t i o n a l a t t r a c t i v e u n a t t r a c t i v e i n t e r e s t i n g u n i n t e r e s t i n g non-racist r a c i s t u s e f u l useless unoffensive o f f e n s i v e a c t i v e * passive* up-to-date out-of-date normal unusual good bad strong* weak* non-sexist s e x i s t *Embedding scales M E T H O D O L O G Y / 30 The final semantic differential subtests were developed on the basis of the results of the pilot study. [See Appendix A for details.] The number of scales was reduced to remove unreliable adjective terms and to increase the statistical power. The relevant "person presentation" scales and the relevant "slide evaluation" scales were embedded in scales not directly relevant to the study, again, in order help mask the actual purpose of the experiment. c. Form of the test The results of the pilot study indicated that the subjects could complete a 15-item semantic differential form in approximately one minute. In order to minimize the time required for the final experiment, two standard forms, or subtests, were developed, each consisting of a set of 15 bipolar adjective scales listed down the page. One subtest contained scales measuring person presentation, the other subtest assessed attitudes towards the photograph as a whole. [See Appendix B for final semantic differential forms.] The adjective scales were divided into seven alternatives with which to rate the stimulus concepts. A t the top of the adjective list, the scale positions were numbered from "1" to "7", from left to right. The positive and negative poles of different adjective pairs were assigned at random to the value of "1" or "7" so that the subjects would not be influenced by a standard order when rating the concepts. General stimulus concept labels were listed at the top of the person perception forms. M E T H O D O L O G Y / 31 d. Validity and reliability The content universe sampled was multicultural and development education literature on racist, ethnic, and sexist bias in educational material. The literature pertained mainly to the verbal content of school books with only secondary reference to their illustrations. It was assumed, however, that the authors used descriptive terms which could be considered relevant to multicultural and development education materials in general. Representative adjectives were derived from relevant literature found in the libraries of Moray College of Education in Edinburgh and Woodlands Teacher Centre in Glasgow. A list was made up of adjective terms describing both desirable and undesirable attributes of the way in which people are represented in educational materials. The terms used for the "person presentation" scales in Table 1 were derived mainly from adjective lists such as those found in "Words and Faces" (1983) and in Pratt's (1972) "assertion analysis", and from general checklists and guidelines obtained from Clark (1979), Hicks (1980), Klein (1980), Saunders (1982), and the World Council of Churches (1978). The adjectives used in the development of the "slide evaluation" scales in Table 2 were selected from guidelines containing such suggestions as: "Assess whether the book is factually accurate", "Do not pass over or ignore a racist concept or cliche", "Are the illustrations realistic?" (World Council of Churches, 1978); "Beware of material which presents stereotypes", "Information should be as up-to-date as possible" (Clark, 1979); and "Look for inaccuracies and inappropriateness in the descriptions" (Saunders, 1982). The purpose of this method of sampling was to generate a pool of adjectives which would be M E T H O D O L O G Y / 32 representative of the terms used to detect and evaluate the presence of bias in educational material. A Hoyt analysis of variance (Nelson, 1974) established the degree of reliability of the semantic differential instrument developed for the present experiment. This method of gauging internal consistency estimated the extent to which each test item represented what the test as a whole measured (i.e., connotative responses to the visual concepts presented). The results revealed high reliability coefficients for both subtests (r = 0.78 for the person presentation subtest, and r = 0.77 for the slide evaluation subtest) and for the total test (r = 0.75). Coefficients of 1.00 are indicative of a perfectly reliable test. A coefficient of 0.7 or more is acceptable for tests designed to assess group averages as is the case in this study. The item analysis was performed after the removal of the scales not considered stable or relevant to the study. [See Appendix C for details.] B. POPULATION AND SAMPLING TECHNIQUES 1. Population The target population was first-year teacher trainees in Scotland enrolled in an Environmental Studies course. Most of these teacher trainees are white, middle class, British, educated in Britain, and between the ages of 19 and 25. These teacher trainees were chosen for this study because, as multicultural education is often approached through Environmental Studies courses, these M E T H O D O L O G Y / 33 students can be assumed to be familiar with the type of visual stimuli presented in the study, and because of their obvious future position of responsibility in the primary school system. 2. Sample The study sample consisted of teacher trainees from Moray House College of Education in Edinburgh. Twenty-six class members volunteered to remain in class in order to take part in the experiment. These students were in their first year of a Bachelor of Education degree and were all enrolled in the same Environmental Studies course. They were white, middle class, British, educated in Britain, and in their early to middle 20's. This group of teacher trainees was specifically chosen for the study because their course work heavily emphasized multicultural education. They may be somewhat more aware of stereotyping than other students in first year Environmental Education courses because of their teacher's strong concentration on multicultural education. Otherwise, they are highly representative of the population described above with respect to nationality, age, cultural background, socioeconomic group, and education. As the subjects were fairly homogeneous in these respects it could be assumed that individual differences would not mask a valid treatment effect. M E T H O D O L O G Y / 34 C. D E S I G N O F T H E E X P E R I M E N T 1. Overa l l design The visual stimuli, four colour slides depicting plantation workers (two test slides, and two embedding slides), were presented to a group of teacher trainees who were asked to record their reactions to the individuals depicted and to each slide as a whole on the semantic differential forms provided. A posttest-only control-group design was used for the experiment. This type of design is appropriate when there is a possibility that a pretest would have an effect on the experimental treatment (Borg & Gall, 1983). The effects of the treatment application were determined statistically by comparing the control and experimental scores using an analysis of variance test for a repeated measures design. The repeated, or within subjects factor was the stimulus slide viewed. The between subjects, or grouping factor was label treatment. The subjects were randomly assigned to the treatment and control groups. Each subject was measured at all levels of the within subjects factor and at one level of the grouping factor. That is, all subjects viewed all of the visual stimuli, whereas only half, the experimental group, were exposed to the loaded label for each slide. The responses of all subjects were recorded immediately. M E T H O D O L O G Y / 35 Slide 1 Slide 2 Group n Plantation Worker Dummy Slide Tea Picker Dummy Slide 1 Loaded label 1 2 3 13 * * 2 Neutral label 14 15 16 26 * * Figure 1. Schematic representation of experimental design: between subjects (label type) and within subjects (slides) factors. (The same design was used for the person presentation and slide evaluation subtests. *Data not to be analysed.) M E T H O D O L O G Y / 36 2. Design variables a. Independent variables i) Stimulus materials Each of the two slides was used as the source of two visual stimuli or concepts. The first concept judged for each slide was the manner in which the individual depicted was presented in the photograph. The second concept rated was the photograph as a whole. ii) Treatment The control group was exposed to the "neutral" labels -- "Plantation Worker" and "Tea Picker" - listed at the top of the respective person presentation forms. The treatment group was exposed to the "loaded" labels ~ "Native Plantation Worker" and "Woman Tea Picker" - also listed at the top of the relevant person presentation forms. b. Dependent variables i) Person presentation scale-responses Fifteen adjective pairs made up the final person presentation form used to measure the reactions to the way in which each individual was presented in the different slides (see Table 1). ii) Slide evaluation scale-responses Fifteen adjective pairs made up the form used for recording the responses to each photograph (see Table 2). M E T H O D O L O G Y / 37 D . P R O C E D U R E S 1. Data collection Each subject received a booklet in which to rate the four slides and the persons depicted therein. Two forms of the booklet had been prepared. One half of the booklets contained treatment, or loaded labels for slides one and three, while the other half contained the control, or neutral labels for these slides. The audience was not informed about these differences, nor were they informed that the second and fourth slides were dummy slides. Directions for rating the slides were typed on the booklet covers and were reviewed orally using a sample slide (see Appendix B). The slides were projected onto a screen at the front of the classroom, with the students seated as they would normally be for a regular class lecture. Each slide was presented for two minutes. The students rated each one, first, for one minute, on the person presentation scales then, for another minute, on the slide evaluation scales. The subjects were asked to assess the material as if previewing it before possible use in a classroom situation. As the group was guided through the sequence of stimulus concepts to be studied and rated, the subjects were requested to indicate their judgements of: a) the manner in which specific individuals were portrayed, and b) each slide as a whole. M E T H O D O L O G Y / 38 The complete 80-item test (two 15-item forms per test slide) required four minutes to complete. Including four minutes to rate the embedding slides, and ten minutes for distributing and explaining the material, the entire experiment took approximately 20 minutes. 2. S c o r i n g p r o c e d u r e s Each person depicted and each slide were rated by all subjects on seven-point adjective scales. Subjects rated the stimulus concepts by checking a point representing the direction and intensity of their reactions on each of the scales provided. The resulting raw data, consisting of marks corresponding to numbers ranging from "1" to "7", had to be transformed so that the polarity of the adjective terms would be consistent. Therefore, a value of. "1" was assigned uniformly to the extreme positive position, and a value "7" was assigned to the extreme negative position. After transformation, the lower the final score on an item was, the more positively the subject felt towards the concept along the associated scale, and vice versa. IV. RESULTS A. DATA ANALYSIS The embedding scales were eliminated from the semantic differential test before any analyses took place. These scales were "individualistic/stereotypic", "active/passive", "strong/weak", and "contented/discontented" from the person presentation subtest, and "strong/weak", and "active/passive" from the slide evaluation subtest. The directionality and intensity of the overall responses to the two stimulus slides were measured on the relevant semantic differential scales. Group means from the two label conditions were pooled together for each of the concepts rated. Semantic profiles of the results were created by connecting the points representing the mean scale ratings for each concept. Separate analyses for the person presentation and the slide evaluation subtests were performed using the programme U B C - C G R O U P (Lai, 1982). This hierarchical grouping analysis determines the extent to which natural clusters, that is, groups made up scales having similar score profiles, exist among the series of scales involved. Scales are progressively associated into groups so as to minimize the variation within the groups. Each resulting cluster, therefore, can be regarded as representing a unique attribute of the concepts rated. The reduction of the number of variables in this manner increases the statistical power of the design and may indicate the presence of meaningful dimensions of attitude. The scores 39 R E S U L T S / 40 from both experimental conditions were pooled together for each subtest before each cluster analysis. The experimental design was extended by including cluster score as an additional within subjects factor. First, the cluster scores were calculated from the mean scores of the scales making up each cluster. Then, the statistical procedure B M D P (Dixon, 1983), an analysis of variance for repeated measures, analyzed the cluster scores for any interaction effects occurring between the treatment and the specific concept rated. Again, separate analyses were run on the two subtests. Differences in response as a consequence of label treatment, slide viewed, and adjective cluster were examined for both subtests. The statistical package L E R T A P (Nelson, 1974), used to establish the reliability of the test as discussed in the Methodology section above, provided information on the intercorrelations occurring between the subtests and the entire test. These correlations were derived from the Pearson product-moment coefficient. As in the cluster analyses, scores from both label conditions were pooled together for each subtest. B. FINDINGS The first objective of this study was to use the semantic differential technique in order to quantify the direction and intensity of teacher trainees' reactions towards slides depicting Third World plantation workers. R E S U L T S / 41 The following codes represent the intensity of the mean responses recorded on a seven-point scale: Quite: less than or equal to 3 and greater than 2; more than or equal to 5 and less than 6. Slightly: less than 3.5 and greater than 3; more than 4.5 and less than 5. Neutral: greater than or equal to 3.5 and less than or equal to 4.5. The subjects perceived the "Worker" as being slightly powerless, ignorant, subordinate, expert, and responsible; and quite inferior and backward. The "Picker" was slightly inferior, powerless, backward, and subordinate; and quite expert, skilful, and responsible (see Figure 2). The "Worker" slide as a whole was rated slightly accurate, interesting, useful, and normal; and quite appropriate, stereotyping, and traditional. The "Picker" slide was slightly attractive, unoffensive, and good; and quite accurate, appropriate, interesting, useful, up-to-date, normal, traditional, and stereotyping (see Figure 3). RESULTS / 42 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 superior i n f e r i o r 1/ independent . . . . / . . . dependent n powerful . . . . h . . . powerless advanced jV. p r i m i t i v e knowledgeable . . . / J . . . ignorant expert . . / inexpert dominant . . . . -\. . . subordinate s k i l f u l . . / . . . u n s k i l l e d \ \ f r e e . . . . . . subjugated / / responsible . . <f / - • • • i r r e s o o n s i b l e \ \ s u c c e s s f u l . . . \ X . . . unsuccessful Figure 2. Semantic profile of mean responses to persons depicted in photographs. (Solid line represents responses to "Worker", broken line represents responses to "Picker". The data were transformed so that the left-hand column contains only positive terms, and the right-hand column contains only negative terms.) RESULTS / 43 accurate a p p r o p r i a t e non-stereotyping p r o g r e s s i v e a t t r a c t i v e i n t e r e s t i n g n o n - r a c i s t u s e f u l •unoffensive up-to-date n o r a a l good non-sexist i n a c c u r a t e i n a p p r o p r i a t e s t e r e o t y p i n g t r a d i t i o n a l u n a t t r a c t i v e u n i n t e r e s t i n g r a c i s t useless o f f e n s i v e out-of-date unusual b a d s e x i s t Figure 3. Semantic profile of mean responses to slides. (Solid line represents responses to slide 1, broken line represents response to slide 2. The data were transformed so that the left-hand column contains only positive terms, and the right-hand column contains only negative terms.) R E S U L T S / 44 The results of the cluster analysis can be seen in Tables 3 and 4 below. According to the substantial error jumps which occurred when the number of groups was reduced from four to three for the person presentation items, and from five to four for the slide evaluation items, it may be concluded that three and four "natural" groups exist among the person presentation and slide evaluation items, respectively. [See Appendix D for tree graphs of the grouping procedures.] The scales forming the person presentation clusters appear to be associated with one another in a coherent, connotatively natural manner. These clusters have therefore been designated by labels summarizing the personal attributes or characteristics indicated by the scales involved (see Table 3). Each cluster can be regarded as representing a different dimension of the subjects' attitudes towards certain aspects of individuals viewed. Clusters 3 and 4 generated from the slide evaluation analysis could be considered natural scale groupings. However, neither cluster 1 nor 2 are consistently composed of scales closely related on a semantic basis. Therefore, in discussing the results of the slide evaluation subtest, the clusters are deemed natural mainly from a statistical point of view. RESULTS / Table 3 Person Presentation Clusters C l u s t e r (C) A d j e c t i v e P a i r s 1 super i o r / i n f er i o r 1 a d v a n c e d / b a c k w a r d 1 power f u1 / p o w e r l e s s 1 d o m i n a n t / s u b o r d i n a t e 1 i n d e p e n d e n t / d e p e n d e n t 2 k n o w l e d g e a b l e / i g n o r a n t 2 s u c c e s s f u l / u n s u c c e s s f u l 2 f r e e / s u b j u g a t e d 3 e x p e r t / i n e x p e r t 3 r e s p o n s i b l e / i r r e s p o n s i b l e 3 s k i l f u l / u n s k i l l e d Note. Values represent order of formation of clusters. C l = social status dimension, C2 = personal status, C3 = professional status. RESULTS / Table 4 Slide Evaluation Clusters C l u s t e r A d j e c t i v e P a i r s (C) 1 accurate/inaccurate 1 appropriate/inappropriate 1 i n t e r e s t i n g / u n i n t e r e s t i n g 1 useful/useless 1 normal/unusual 2 a t t r a c t i v e / u n a t t r a c t i v e 2 unoffensive/offensive 2 up-to-date/out-of-date 2 good/bad 3 non-s t er eotyping/s t ereotyping 3 p r o g r e s s i v e / t r a d i t i o n a l 4 n o n - r a c i s t / r a c i s t 4 n o n - s e x i s t / s e x i s t Note. Values represent, order of formation of clusters. RESULTS / 47 Cluster scores, calculated by averaging the mean scores of the of the scales associated with each cluster, are shown in Tables 5 and 6 below. Table 5 Cluster Scores: Person Presentation L A B E L •f A V E R A G E PERSON C L U S T E R N E U T R A L ( N ) L O A D E D ( L ) (N+L) 1 1 4 . 8 2 4 . 7 2 4 . 7 7 1 2 4 . 7 5 4 . 12 4 . 4 3 1 3 4 . 0 5 3 . 0 0 3 . 5 3 2 1 4 . as 4 . S3 4 . 7 5 2 2 3 . 8 7 3 . 8 4 3 . 8 5 2 3 2 . 5 2 2 . 6 4 2 . 5 7 Note. Values represent mean score of scales making up each cluster. RESULTS / 48 Table 6 Cluster Scores: Slide Evaluation L A B E L AVERAGE S L I D E C L U S T E R N E U T R A L ( N ) L O A D E D ( L ) (N+L) 1 1 3 . 18 3 . 0 6 3 . 1 2 1 2 3 . 8 4 3 . SO 3 . 7 2 1 3 5 . 5 8 5 . 12 5 . 35 1 4 4 . 5 4 4 .08 4 . 3 1 2 1 2 . 5 8 2 . 6 3 2 . S 1 2 2 3 . 2 S 3 . 17 3 . 2 2 2 3 5 . 46 5 . 1 2 5 . 2 9 2 4 4 . 0 0 3 . 8 8 3 . 94 Note. Values represent mean score of scales making up each cluster. RESULTS / 49 The second objective was to determine the effect of loaded labels on teacher trainees' reactions to images of Third World plantation workers and to the photographs depicting them. The analyses of variance for repeated measures was based on the three and four levels of the within subjects factor specified by the cluster analyses for person presentation and slide evaluation, respectively. The results of the analyses of variance are summarized in Tables 7 and 8 below. Table 7 Analysis of Variance for Repeated Measures: Person Presentation SOURCE SUM OF DEGREES OF MEAN F 2 TAIL SQUARES FREEDOM SQUARE PROB. MEAN 2476 83652 1 2476 83652 1536 53 0 oooo TREATMENT 3 94257 1 3 94257 2 45 0 1309 ERROR 38 68718 24 1 61 197 PERSON 10 46256 1 10 46256 16 68 0 0O04 ** P X T 2 88103 1 2 88103 4 59 0 0424 * ERROR 15 04974 24 0 62707 CLUSTER 77 63807 2 38 8 1903 61 94 0 OOOO** C X T 0 60167 2 0 30083 0 48 0 6217 ERROR 30 08360 48 0 62674 P X C 5 66167 2 2 83083 7 02 0 0021 ** P X C X T 2 82321 2 1 41 160 3 50 0 0381 * ERROR 19 35179 48 0 40316 iVore. T=label treatment, P=person depicted, C = adjective cluster. *p<.05. **p<.01. RESULTS / Table 8 Analysis of Variance for Repeated Measures: Slide Evaluation SOURCE SUM OF DEGREES OF MEAN F 2 TAIL SQUARES FREEDOM SQUARE PROB. MEAN 3235 05777 1 3235 05777 1252 82 0 0000 TREATMENT 2 S1005 1 2 61005 1 01 0 3247 ERROR 61 97307 24 2 58221 SLIDE 6 7S082 1 6 7G082 8 21 0 0085 ** S X T 0 49043 1 0 49043 0 60 0 4479 ERROR 19 770O0 24 0 82375 CLUSTER 172 08790 3 57 36263 42 54 0 OOOO C X T 0 96668 3 0 32223 0 24 0 3689 ERROR 97 08923 72 1 34846 S X C 1 77130 3 0 59043 1 65 0 1855 S X C X T 0 10476 3 0 03492 0 10 0 961 1 ERROR 25 76769 72 0 35788 Note. T = label treatment, S = slide viewed, C = adjective cluster. *p<.05. **p<.Ol. R E S U L T S / 51 The statistical analyses revealed significant differences in responses which can be ascribed to differences in some of the independent variables involved. In the case of the person perception responses, the treatment labels themselves had no overall significant effect, that is, the labels did not affect responses to both of the slides presented. However, there were highly significant person and cluster effects (see Figures 4 and 5). Both persons received neutral ratings when responses on all three clusters were averaged together, but the "Picker" was rated more positively overall than the "Worker", F(l ,24)= 16.68, p = .0004; and the persons, in general, depicted in the slides, were rated negatively on cluster 1 (the social status dimension), neutrally on cluster 2 (the personal status dimension), and positively on cluster 3 (the professional status dimension), F(2,48) = 61.94, p = .0000. Significant interaction effects also emerged. The interaction between treatment and person was significant, F(l,24) = 4.59, p = .0424 (see Figure 6): the loaded label had no effect on responses to the "Picker", yet affected ratings of the "Worker" in a positive direction. The interaction between person and cluster was highly significant, F(2,24) = 7.02, p = .0021, (see Figure 7): on clusters 2 and 3 the "Picker" was rated more positively than the "Worker", whereas on the social status dimension, responses to both persons were similarly negative. And finally, the interaction between person, cluster, and treatment was significant, F(2,24) = 3.5, p = .0381, that is, different patterns of response were revealed depending on the combination of person depicted, treatment applied, and adjective scales used for rating the presentation of the individual viewed. RESULTS / 52 i.2 4.0 to a t-t -p cd u CD o 3. CD cd CD > 3.6 W o r k e r P i c k e r P e r s o n d e p i c t e d Figure 4. Person effect. (Ratings on clusters 1, 2, and 3 averaged together across both label conditions. F(l.24)= 16.68, p = .0004.) RESULTS / 53 i.5 4.0 3.5 3.0 0 C S o c i a l P e r s o n a l P r o f e s s i o n a l A d j e c t i v e c l u s t e r - s t a t u s Figure 5. Cluster effect: person presentation. (Ratings averaged across both, label conditions. F(2,48) = 61.94, p = .0000.) RESULTS / 54 bo c 1-1 -p <d fn CD rH cd o 01 CD CD > 4 . 4 4 . 2 4 . 0 3 . 8 3 . 6 L o a d e d l a b e l N e u t r a l l a b e l A W o r k e r P i c k e r P e r s o n d e p i c t e d Figure 6. Person by treatment interaction. (Responses averaged across all 3 clusters. F(l,24) = 4.59, p = .0424.) RESULTS / 55 S o c i a l P e r s o n a l P r o f e s s i o n a l A d j e c t i v e c l u s t e r - s t a t u s Figure 7. Person by cluster interaction. (Ratings averaged over both label conditions. F(2,24) = 7.02, p = .0021.) R E S U L T S / 56 In a separate t test analysis for independent pairs (Lai, 1984), responses on clusters 2 and 3 for slide 1 appeared to be affected by the label treatment. [See Appendix E for details.] The individual viewed was perceived in a more favourable light on these clusters when labelled "Native Plantation Worker", than when labelled simply "Plantation Worker". The mean scores for C2 were 4.12 for the treatment, and 4.75 for the control condition. Apparently the loaded label neutralised the negative bias on C2 and induced a positive bias on C3. The t test results indicated a significant positive treatment effect, <(24) = 2.53, p = .019. For C3, the mean scores for the treatment and the control conditions were 3.00 and 4.05, respectively. The t test results, once again, revealed a significant positive treatment effect, £(24) = 2.49, JP>=.019. In the case of the slide evaluation responses, the treatment labels had no significant effect (see Table 5). However, the slides and the clusters had highly significant effects: slide 2 was rated more positively than slide 1, F(l,24) = 6.76, p = .0085 (see Figure 8); and both slides were rated positively on clusters 1 and 2, negatively on cluster 3, and neutrally on cluster 4, F(3,72) = 57.36, p = .0000 (see Figure 9). RESULTS / 57 3.8 3.6 S l i d e Figure 8. Slide effect. (Cluster ratings averaged together across both label conditions. F(l,24) = 6.76, p = .0085.) RESULTS / 58 5.0 10 c •H -P a3 ?H (!) -P ca 3 4..0 3 .0 2 3 C l u s t e r Figure 9. Cluster effect: slide evaluation. (Ratings pooled across both label conditions. F(3,72) = 57.36, p = .0000.) R E S U L T S / 59 The third and final objective of the study was to analyse the relationship between the person presentation ratings and the slide evaluations. The results of the Hoyt's estimate of reliability indicated that the correlation (r = 0.024) between the subtests was not significant [See Appendix C for details.] That is, overall, the subjects' perceptions of the individuals depicted did not significantly affect their assessments of the slides viewed. V . D I S C U S S I O N A . S U M M A R Y The problem under investigation was the analysis of the connotative meaning of educational slides portraying Third World plantation workers. Teacher trainees' reactions to the stimulus materials were recorded on semantic differential scales in order to determine quantitatively the effect of different labels on perceptions of the persons depicted. Two 15-item semantic differential forms were constructed using bipolar adjective scales. These scales had been derived from qualitative guidelines found in multicultural and development education literature on the analysis of bias in educational materials and had been tested in a pilot study. Subjects first rated the manner in which the person was presented and then the slide itself by making judgements against the relevant series of descriptive scales. A posttest-only control group design was used to measure the effect of the labels on the subjects' responses to the visual stimuli. Two forms of the response booklet - half containing the treatment, or loaded, labels, the other half containing the control, or neutral, labels — were distributed randomly to the subjects. Viewers judged both persons depicted in the slides to be presented in an inferior, backward, powerless, and subordinate yet expert and responsible light. The "Picker" was rated skilful as well, and more positively overall, however, than the "Worker". Both slides appeared accurate, interesting, useful, normal, appropriate and, at the same time, stereotyping and traditional. The "Picker" slide was also 60 DISCUSSION / 61 rated attractive, unoffensive, good, and up-to-date. This slide generally received higher ratings than the "Worker" slide. Overall, both individuals depicted were rated negatively on cluster 1, the social status dimension (inferior, backward, powerless, subordinate, dependent), neutrally on cluster 2, the personal status dimension (knowledgeable/ignorant, successful/unsuccessful, free/subjugated), and positively on cluster 3, the professional status dimension (expert, responsible, skilful). Both slides were rated positively on cluster 1 (accurate, appropriate, interesting, useful, normal), neutrally on cluster 4 (attractive/unattractive, unoffensive/offensive, up-to-date/out-of-date, good/bad), and negatively on cluster 3 (stereotyping, traditional). On cluster 2 (non-racist/racist, non-sexist/sexist), however, the "Worker" slide was rated neutrally while the "Picker" slide was rated positively. The statistical analysis of the test scores indicated that the treatment had no overall effect, yet it appeared that the treatment did affect the perceptions of the individual depicted in slide 1. The loaded label, "Native Plantation Worker", directed the subjects towards a more positive reading on the professional status dimension and a more neutral reading on the personal status dimension. The relationship between person presentation rating and slide evaluations was not found to be significant. Overall, the perceptions of the individual depicted did not affect the assessments of the slide itself. DISCUSSION / 62 B. CONCLUSIONS In this study, the semantic differential test developed provided an efficient and effective technique for eliciting connotative responses to presented stimuli. The scores were easily manipulated and interpreted: indications about where biases lay were obtained directly from group means and from a visual inspection of the semantic profiles created from these ratings; and statistical differences were evaluated from simple analysis of variance procedures. The adjective scales not only measured direction of response, but intensity as well. As Saunders (1982) has pointed out, to be able to measure the degree of bias is important since almost all of the prevailing educational materials are biased to some extent. Once the intensity of an assessment has been calculated, different materials can be compared on the basis of which components lend themselves more to negative interpretations. The results" of this experiment indicated that the persons depicted, whether labelled or not, were seen in a negative or neutral manner. The slides presented few positive images. Different patterns of response were revealed by the three main clusters of the person presentation scales which sorted together. The subjects rated the labourers negatively on the social status dimension, yet positively on the professional status dimension. Neutral responses were recorded on the personal status dimension. The picture of the labourers then becomes one of people accredited with a socially inferior status who are nevertheless proficient at their work. The teacher trainees rating the material may actually partake of the end products of this labour (eg., in the form of imported tea or bananas) DISCUSSION / 63 and therefore may have developed positive views of the people as "providers". However, the same subjects would have had little direct experience with these people and therefore could hardly develop well substantiated personal notions about their level of inferiority, backwardness, and so on. The slides show that the people are at work but do not "show" their social status. The supposedly objective judgements of the way the people are depicted in the slides most probably reflect the general social attitudes of the subjects' background. Note that the subjects had been asked to rate how they thought the persons were presented, not how they personally felt about those persons. The subjects may have responded more positively overall in an effort not to appear prejudiced. Even so, the results may indicate that the subjects were not able, after all, to analyse the presentation of the plantation workers objectively, and were actually affected by the labels in a programmed manner. The neutral responses on the personal status dimension may demonstrate a low degree of relevance of the scales to the concept or to the viewers. That is, it may not be of immediate importance to the subjects how satisfactory or unsatisfactory the workers' personal lives are. The slide evaluation scales sorted out into four clusters. The responses on these clusters were mainly positive or neutral. It appears somewhat contradictory that the slides could be rated stereotyping and traditional and yet, at the same time, accurate and appropriate for both slides, and up-to-date as well for the "Picker" slide. The slides were also rated neutrally on the racism scale while the people depicted were judged to be presented in an inferior, backward, powerless, and subordinate manner. This effect could be related to the relevance that the DISCUSSION / 64 different scale terms held for the viewers. The terms "racist" and "sexist" may have few connotations for this group, and therefore elicited more neutral reactions. Or it may be that the teacher trainees were not comfortable with the concept of racism and preferred not to respond to it. The teacher trainees at Moray House College did acknowledge that the emphasis was on descriptive multiculturalism in class discussions rather than, for example, on antiracism. The patterns of response to the concepts presented disclosed significant interactions of label with person and slide presented and of label with adjective cluster. The treatment affected responses to the image of the "Worker", whereas the two slide evaluations and the "Picker" person ratings remained constant under the two experimental conditions. The "Worker" clusters themselves were also affected differentially by the label treatment. The social status cluster, on which ratings were negative and of the highest intensity, was not affected. However, the profession cluster, which received the most neutral ratings in the control conditions, was affected the most strongly, and in a positive direction. It may be that the ratings on the social status dimension reflect strong views held by the subjects and therefore slight changes in the title would have relatively little effect. Where the subjects felt neutral the treatment could exert a visible influence. Apparently, the negotiation between the message and the viewer produced a meaning that in the first case was determined more by the respondent and in the second more by the components of the message itself. It would have been interesting to follow up the results with the sample group, through discussion or further testing, in an attempt to discover why the label "Native" had a positive effect on some of their views. Perhaps the term struck DISCUSSION / 65 a chord of guilt or a feeling of sympathy towards the worker. The term "Native" may also have a sound of authority associated with it in respect to the actual plantation work performed. The relationship between the subjects' perceptions of the manner in which the plantation labourers were depicted and the ratings given to the slides themselves was not found to be statistically significant. However, the slides did receive more positive ratings overall than did the individuals depicted. A similar pattern of responses had been revealed in a previous study (Yas, 1986) where a South African "Orange Growing" poster was initially rated positively even though the workers depicted were judged to be presented in a negative light. The results from these studies suggest that the overall assessments given to the visual materials at hand cannot necessarily be used to predict the absence or presence of negative images of the people portrayed. When concerned with such issues as bias and stereotyping, it would appear more relevant to concentrate on the persons depicted than to rate the visual as a whole. C. LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY On the clusters used to measure the perceptions of the simulus materials, few of the assessments were seen to be significantly affected by the loaded label treatment. This could be a true measure of the treatment effect or could have resulted at least in part from methodological problems. For instance, the semantic differential technique is known for its stability when used with a homogeneous sample and therefore any differences in ratings can be assumed to be due to DISCUSSION / 66 the treatment effect. From a statistical point of view, however, it would have been desirable to have had a larger sample. Originally there were to have been 40 subjects, 20 per treatment. With a larger sample, a more traditional, and statistically more powerful factor anatysis could have been used. It is also important to note that an interaction between demographic characteristics and both the visual materials presented and the adjective scales selected, is most likely in effect. The subjects involved in the studj' were highly representative of the specific population sampled, however, the population itself is strictly delineated as white, middle class British teacher trainees in their early 20's. The results cannot be generalised outside of this group. According to Hall (1973), social forces such as class, education, occupation, political affiliation, geographical region, and religion help determine what the reader brings to the negotiation with the text. A Sri Lankan teacher trainee, for example, or an all male audience, may respond quite differently to the image of the "Tea Picker" and to the label "Woman" when compared to the present experimental group. Apart from the value of the information that would be gained by including personal characteristics, random assignment may not be totally successful in eliminating all possible initial differences between the experimental and control groups. A pretest-posttest control-group design would have accounted for these differences (Borg & Gall, 1983). However, a pretest in this situation would have sensitized the experimental subjects to the presence of the treatment. Another way to control for this source of error would have been to administer a pretest several weeks in advance of the treatment and posttest. DISCUSSION / 67 The results of the cluster analysis are also limited to the specific population sampled. Different adjective clusters would most likely have been formed if the materials had been rated by any group other than the white, middle class British subjects involved in this study. The meanings of words often evolve in isolation over time and space (Fiske, 1982). Therefore, terms considered equivalent, or at least closely related, to one cultural group or subgroup may well have divergent connotations to another. The clusters are mainly of value in simplifying the statistical analysis and in making viewers more aware of the coherence of their own prejudices. A major problem concerning the semantic differential scales themselves is the interpretation of the scale position "4". Different subjects may be assigning different meanings to this position. Unless it is automatically assumed that the terms derived from general multicultural and development education guidelines would be relevant for the analysis of bias in all forms of educational materials, "4" may represent a "neutral" response or signify that the subjects did not find the scale terms applicable to the concept. The method that was used. for scale construction could be considered somewhat artificial as the subjects did not supply their own terms. Scales generated from a group discussion on the stimulus material may have been more specifically relevant to the slides and to the subjects, and therefore may have been affected differently by the treatment than were the actual scales used. In the pilot study a category was available to indicate the irrelevance of a scale to the stimulus concept. However, the sample size may have been insufficient to get a true picture of the situation: only six respondants took part in that study. DISCUSSION / 68 Another problem noted with respect to the bipolar scales was that the observers were not necessarily in agreement with regards to their interpretations of the adjective terms. From the discussion which arose after the tests, it became obvious that some of the subjects had felt unsure, for example, about the context of the usefulness of the slides and therefore responded on the useful/useless scale with a "4" rating. Responses may have also been affected by a "halo" effect. This occurs when observers rate a concept on scales in the same overall rating. Randomising the polarity of the positive and negative terms may not have totally eliminated the effects of this phenomenon. Further research using the semantic differential technique in the analysis of bias in visual educational material should include larger subject samples, subjects from different backgrounds, and a more extensive selection of visual materials representative of those used in multicultural and development education. Semantic differential tests could be devised so as to include descriptive terms specific to the population and concepts sampled (eg., derived from open discussion on the stimulus materials) as well as terms generated from general, yet relevant qualitative guidelines. The ensuing semantic differential forms should be reviewed and discussed by a pilot sample large enough to ensure that each scale has a clear meaning with respect to the stimulus concepts. D. IMPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS It is evident from the results of this experiment and others, that labels interact with the visual elements of a message to create a meaning which may be DISCUSSION / 69 unpredicated in quality, direction, and intensity. As visual communication is fast becoming a dominant mode of communication in our society (Dake, 1982), one must now be both visually and verbally literate to deal effectively with the powerful communicative forces involved. People must also be aware of the interaction between visual and verbal information to be able to judiciously interpret, evaluate, and create messages containing both forms of communications. It is insufficient to merely "look" at a visual text, one must be educated to "read" it, that is, to be able to create meaning from the concrete elements involved and to share these meanings with others. The processing of visual information gives an immediate appraisal of reality (Sikora, 1980), which if too rapid, may lead to programmed responses and stereotyping. In order to promote critical assessments of the meanings emerging from visual messages, it is apparent from the literature (Pratt, 1972; Saunders, 1982) that guidelines are required which focus the viewer's attention on the relevant components. The use of semantic differentials may fulfill these requirements while at the same time ensuring that the respondents' analytical processes are uniform, and that the ensuing results can be easily plotted on semantic profiles and analysed visually or statistically as desired. It may be easy to believe that the connotative values exhibited in visual messages are purely denotative facts. A viewer would normally tend to accept outright the "natural" character of communication via visual images (Fiske, 1982) such as those analysed in this study. Thej' are, after all, made up of photographs taken of "real" people in "real" places, and supposedly labelled with objective terms. On the surface, these appear to be purely denotative DISCUSSION / 70 representations of people and of their lives in tropical countries. The average reader does not instinctively consider the processess that went into creating such messages (Fiske, 1982). For example, who took or selected the photographs? Who decided on the labels? What kind of decisions went into their selection? Whether or not viewers are conscious of these issues, their responses are nevertheless affected by the choices implicated. The creators involved in assembling the composite verbal-pictorial messages intentionally or unintentionally displayed particular points of view. These perspectives may induce unpredicted, negative responses within certain members of the intended audience. It is obviously educationally sound to label visual materials, but the author must recognize that a message intended to be purely denotative may have strong emotional connotations to a viewer, connotations which can colour the entire message. It is impossible and undesirable to eliminate the connotative effect of images and words, but these effects can be taken into account by their authors and explored with the audience. A n author need not experimentally analyse all possible choices before creating a message. Instead, different units within the message may be substituted mentally. Bearing in mind that the interpretation of a message varies at all levels of meaning according to what the viewer brings to the viewing experience (Baggaley, 1980), the author can imagine how each change might affect the overall meaning generated by the intended audience. From the readers' point of view, semantic differentials can help guard against the automatic acceptance of visual materials at face value by providing a framework for reading them, and by supplying verbal terms with which to discuss the different aspects involved. DISCUSSION / 71 The results obtained from further research using the semantic differential technique in the analysis of visual bias could be used to produce general semantic differential forms for teacher training or even in-service purposes. Where desired, participants could add terms specifically relevant to the particular material studied. Semantic profiles of individual or group results would allow for rapid visual assessments of the results thus providing for an immediate, concrete basis for discussion as well as for feedback on the viewer's progress as an aware reader and educator. If teachers continue to use stereotyped visual images and labels in the classroom uncritically, thej' will maintain the status quo through a lack of selectiveness and questioning. Too often, teachers, like their students, remain unaware of this process. If trainees realise how their own opinions are affected by their personal attitudes and by such external factors as labels, then they will come to understand the possible effects of these influences in the classroom. Semantic differentials could assist educators with respect to visual text selection, not for the purpose of censorship, but to guide them towards more creative applications. Classroom analysis of stereotyped material could actually help primary school children learn about their own attitudes and increase their awareness of the different facets of racism. Note that although the subjects of the present experiment considered the slides stereotyping, they still described them as being useful. Perhaps this was the context of the "usefulness". For example, students could work with prepared semantic differentials or create their own to promote discussion about the possible "reasons" behind biased representations of people, such as in advertising and political or economic propaganda. Slides and DISCUSSION / 72 labels produced by the public relations office of commercial food companies could be studied along side those created on similar themes by agencies engaged in development education. Imagine the enlightening comparisons that could be provoked by contrasting visual materials distributed by Cadbury's with those produced by the educational department of an institution such as U N E S C O . The materials could be examined from different angles and ideas developed on ways to present the same information in an unbiased manner. At present, the curricular strategy most prevalent in multicultural and development education is one that merely provides descriptive information about people from different countries and backgrounds (Aoki, 1978; Ashrif, 1984). Many educators argue that this approach is inadequate and can actually reinforce the stereotypes and prejudices held amongst school children (Ashrif, 1984; Buchignani, 1982). A n unintended, yet perhaps inevitable, outcome is that pupils learn to categorize the members of an ethnic or cultural group as a "monolithic entity with uniform characteristics" (Johnstone, 1981). Because of the apparent objectivity of photography, it is especially easy to accept without question the representations of persons depicted through this medium (Fiske, 1979). As part of a more functional and integrated programme, therefore, a vehicle must be provided to help teachers and students critically analyse the pictorial and verbal components of visual messages. An increased emphasis on visual literacy, using a format such as the semantic differential technique, may contribute to an open environment where public and personal attitudes are critically evaluated, discussed, and, where necessary, challenged. B I B L I O G R A P H Y Aoki, T. (1978). Curriculum approaches to Canadian ethnic histories in the context of citizenship education. The History and Social Science Teacher, 13, 95-99. Ashrif, S. (1984). The hidden curriculum in biology. In T. Corner & A . Johnson (Eds.), Issues in multicultural and antiracist education in Scotland. A report, (pp.7-11). Glasgow: National Association for Multicultural Education. Baggaley, J . (1980). The psychology of the T V image. Westmead, England: Gower. Baggaley, J . , & Duck, S. (1976). Dynamics of television. Westmead, England: Saxon House. Barthes, R. (1977). Image-music-text. New York: Hi l l & Wang. Barty, L . , & Hasmi, H . (1981). Multicultural education - what needs to be done? Edinburgh: Lothian Community Relations Council. Borg, W.R., & Gall, M . D . (1983). Educational research. New York: Longman. Boudreau, G. (1981). What do schools need? In P .L . McCreath (Ed.), Multiculturalism: A handbook for teachers, (pp. 50-52), Halifax: Nova Scotia Teachers Union. Buchignani, N . (1982). Practical strategies to foster inter-racial harmony through the educational system. In V . D'Oyley (Ed.), Perspectives on race, education  and social development: Emphasis on Canada. Proceedings of the Race Relations Institute, (pp. 55-64), Vancouver: University of British Columbia, Centre for the Study of Curriculum and Instruction. Burke, M . (1981). The halo of value in schools. In P .L . McCreath (Ed.), Multiculturalism: A handbook for teachers, (pp. 64-76), Halifax: Nova Scotia Teachers Union. Clark, B. (1979). The changing world and the primary school. London: Centre for 73 / 74 World Development Education. The Council on Interracial Books for Children. (1980). Guidelines for selecting  bias-free textbooks and storybooks. New York: Council on Interracial Books for Children. Dake, D . M . (Ed.). (1982). Curriculums in visual literacy. Ames: Iowa State University Research Foundation. Dixon, W.J . (Ed.). (1983). B M D P (Biomedical computer programs) statistical  software. Berkeley: University of California Press. Emmert, P., & Brooks, W.D. (1970). Methods of research in communications. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Farish, J . (1982). A view in the mirror. In J . Fiske (Ed.), Introduction to  communication studies, (pp. 132-133), London: Methuen. Fiske, J . (1979, June). Semiotics: Its contribution to the study of intercultural communication. Educational Broadcasting International, 51-57. Fiske, J . (1982). Introduction to communication studies. London: Methuen. Fleming, M . , & Levie, W . H . (1978). Instructional message design: Priciples from  the behavioural sciences. Englewood Cliffs, N J : Educational Technology Publications. Hall , S., Hobson, D., Lowe, A . , & Willis, P. (Eds.). (1973). Culture, media,  language. London: Hutchinson. Heinich, R., Molenda, M . , & Russell, J .D. (1982). Instructional media. Toronto: John Wiley. Hicks, D. (1980). Images of the world: an introduction to bias in teaching  materials. London: University of London Institute of Education. Her Majesty's Inspector of Schools. (1984). Learning and teaching: the  environment and the primary school curriculum. Edinburgh: Her Majesty's / 75 Stationery Office. Hornburger, J . M . (1977). A lesson plan to help children identify racial  stereotypes. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Conference on College Composition and Communication, Kansas City, M O . (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 163 521) Jacquinot, G. (1979, December). Semiology and the producer. Educational  Broadcasting International, 185-189. Johnstone, P. A . (1981). Multiculturalism through education: A search for understanding. In P .L . McCreath (Ed.), Multiculturalism: A handbook for  teachers, (pp. 38-49), Halifax: Nova Scotia Teachers Union. Kemp, J .E . (1980). Planning and producing audiovisual materials. New York: Harper and Row. Klein, G. (1984). Resources for multicultural education: an introduction. London: Longman for Schools Council. La i , C. (1982). Hierarchical grouping analysis with optional contiguity constraint. Vancouver: University of British Columbia, Computing Centre. Leimkuhler, B. , & Ziegler, D .J . (1978). Effects of diagnostic labels and subject dogmatism upon the perception of persons. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 47, 583-588. Lundeen, R. (1972). The semantic differential technique and personal construct  theory in image measurement (Discussion Paper No. 5). Toronto: York University, Department of Geography. McClean, B. (1984). Environmental studies. Edinburgh: Leith Walk School. National Union of Teachers. (1979). In black and white - guidelines for teachers  on racial stereotypes in textbooks and learning materials. London: Author. Nelson, L .R. (1974). Guide to L E R T A P (Laboratory of educational research test / 76 analysis) use and interpretation. Dunedin, N.Z: University of Otago, Education Department. Olivera, C.E. (1977). Development education: Innovative approaches in Costa Rica. In G .L . Caplan & V D'Oyley (Eds.), Emerging Education in the Americas:  Canada, Costa Rica, Jamaica, (pp. 1-66), Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education. Oppenheim, A . N . (1970). Questionnaire design and attitude measurement. London: Heinemann. Osgood, C.E. , Suci, G.J . , & Tannenbaum, P . H . (1965). The measurment of  meaning. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press. Overing, R.L.R. (1977). Teacher education and multi-ethnicity. In V . D'Oyley (Ed.), The impact of multi-ethnicity on Canadian education, (pp. 73-78). Toronto: Urban Alliance on Race Relations. Pratt, D. (1972). How to find and measure bias in textbooks. Englewood Cliffs, N J : Educational Technology Publications. Regional Consultative Committee on Primary Education. (1977). Environmental  studies. Edinburgh: Lothian Regional Council, Department of Education. Saunders, M . (1982). Multicultural teaching: a guide for the classroom. London: McGraw-Hill . Scottish Committee on Environmental Studies. (1979). Environmental studies in  the primary school. Edinburgh: Consultative Committee on the Curriculum. Shapson, S., & D'Oyley, V . (Eds.). (1984). Bilingual and multicultural education:  Canadian perspectives. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters. Sikora, P .A . (1981). Visual literacy. International Journal of Instructional Media, 8:2, 143-152. Snider, R.C. (1960). The selection and use of visual media. In J . Ball , & F .C. / 77 Byrnes (Eds.), Visual communication, (pp. 119-128). Washington, D . C : The Association for Educational Communications and Technology. Snider, J .G. , & Osgood, C.E. (Eds.). (1969). Semantic differential technique. Chicago: Aldine. SPSS Inc. (1983). SPSSX: User's guide. New York: McGraw-Hill . Strathclyde Regional Council. (1984). Multi-cultural education. Glasgow: Strathclyde Regional Council, Department of Education. Thompson, J . J . (1969). Instructional communication. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhald. Warr, P.B. , & Knapper, C. (1968). The perception of people and events. London: John Wiley. Williams, C M . , & Debes, J . L . (Eds.). (1970). Proceedings of the First National  Conference on Visual Literacy. Toronto: Pitman. Words and faces: Teachers guide. (1983). London: Acer Project. World Council of Churches. (1978). Racism in children's and school textbooks. Geneva: Author. Yas, A . M . (in press). Foreign economic plants: A learning package for the Royal  Botanic Gardens. Edinburgh: Lothian Regional Council, Department of Education. Yas, A . M . (1986). The meaning of visual educational materials. Unpublished manuscript. Zenger, W.F. , & Zenger, S.K. (1976). Handbook for evaluating and selecting  textbooks. Belmont, CA: Fearon. Zimet, S.G. (1976) Print and prejudice. London: Hodder & Stoughton. APPENDIX Pilot study 78 PILOT S T U D Y - D E V E L O P M E N T OF DIAGNOSTIC S C A L E S / 79 The visual stimuli, four colour slides depicting plantation workers, were presented to a group of six teacher trainees enrolled at Moray House College of Education in Edinburgh. These students, their first year of a BEd degree, were registered in the same Environmental Studies course. They were white, middle class, British, educated in Britain, and in their early to middle 20's. The subjects recorded their reactions to the manner in which individuals were presented and to each slide as a whole on the semantic differential forms provided. The slides were labelled in two different ways, the general control, or "neutral" label and the treatment, or "loaded" label. The semantic differential instrument applied in the pilot study provided an opportunity to obtain information on: a) the relevance of the adjective terms derived from multicultural and development education literature on the analysis of bias in educational materials to the selected concepts, and b) the experimental procedures, for example the amount of time required, and the clarity of the instructions given. 1. Construction of the Semantic Differential Tests a) Concepts Four colour slides depicting plantation workers in Third World countries were chosen for analysis from a slide set included in the Royal Botanic Gardens, Edinburgh instructional package. The four slides depicted i), a Nigerian man harvesting bananas, ii), six Afgani Moslem men working in a rice paddy, iii), a Sri Lankan woman harvesting tea, and iv), two Brasilian agricultural inspectors. Each slide was used as the source of two visual concepts. The first concept to be rated for each slide was the person(s) depicted in the photograph with respect to the manner in which they were presented. The second concept was the slide as a whole. / 80 b) Scales The adjective terms to be investigated were derived from multicultural and development education literature on the analysis of racist and ethnic bias. A list was made up of adjectives descriptive of both desirable and undesirable attributes of educational materials. The literature pertained mainly to the verbal content of books, with secondary reference to their illustrations. Nothing was found directly referring to discrete visual materials such as photographs and slides. The terms selected, however, were assumed to be relevant in general to the analysis of stereotypic bias in educational materials. The terms used for the "person presentation" scales (see Table A l ) were derived mainly from adjective lists such as those found in "Words and Faces" (1983) and in Pratt's (1972) "assertion analysis", and from general checklists and guidelines (Clark, 1979; Hicks, 1980; Klein, 1980; Saunders, 1982; World Council of Churches, 1978). The adjectives used in the development of the "slide evaluation" scales (see Table A2) were selected from guidelines containing such suggestions as: "Assess whether the book is factually accurate", "Do not pass over or ignore a racist concept or cliche", "Are the illustrations realistic?" (World Council of Churches, 1978); "Beware of material which presents stereotypes", "Information should be as up-to-date as possible" (Clark, 1979); and "Look for inaccuracies and inappropriateness in the descriptions" (Saunders, 1982). A large pool of terms was chosen from the most commonly occurring adjectives in order to disclose the terms specifically relevant to the experimental concepts. To produce the final bipolar terms seen in Tables A l and A2 , adjectives were paired with their opposites. When not found in the literature, opposites were selected from Webster's "Thesaurus". Some of the scale terms, such as racist and sexist, were difficult to match with suitable antonyms. Therefore, in certain cases, adjective pairs were made up of terms not directly antithetical. The term nonracist, for example, implies the absence of racism rather than the opposite of racism. Table A l Adjective Pair's: Person Presentation P o s i t i v e term Negative term s c i e n t i f i c u n s c i e n t i f i c f r i e n d l y u n f r i e n d l y superior i n f e r i o r good bad hardworking i d l e independent dependent i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c s t e r e o t y p i c s u c cessful unsuccessful honest dishonest i n t e l l i g e n t u n i n t e l l i g e n t a c t i v e passive powerful powerless expert inexpert a s s e r t i v e submissive advanced backward kind c r u e l dominant subordinate educated uneducated s k i l f u l u n s k i l l e d contented discontented Table A2 Adjective Pairs: Slide Evaluation P o s i t i v e term Negative term accurate inaccurate a t t r a c t i v e u n a t t r a c t i v e up-to-date out-of-date appropriate inappropriate r e a l i s t i c i d e a l i s e d i n t e r e s t i n g u n i n t e r e s t i n g non-racist r a c i s t u s e f u l useless imaginative unimaginative normal unusual non-sexist s e x i s t good bad r e l i a b l e u n r e l i a b l e strong weak non-stereotyping stereotyping unoffensive o f f e n s i v e a c t i v e passive progressive t r a d i t i o n a l e f f e c t i v e ununeffective non-patronising p a t r o n i s i n g / 83 c) Form of the test Two standard semantic differential forms were devised for the pilot study: one made up of the person presentation scales, and consisting of 20 adjective pairs (see Table A l ) ; the other made up of the slide evaluation scales, also consisting of 20 adjective pairs (see Table A2). Scale positions were numbered from "1" to "7", from left to right. The positive and negative poles of the different adjective pairs were assigned at random to the value of "1" or "7" so that the subjects would not be influenced by a standard order when rating the concepts. Verbal labels were not attached to the seven scale positions. If the assumption is correct, that the authors used descriptive terms relevant to multicultural and development education materials in general, then the method described above should generate adjectives similar to those that would evolve out of a free discussion on the slide contents. In order to ascertain the relevance of the scales with respect to the specific population sampled, however, a category for rating scales not applicable (NA) to a presented concept was included to the right-hand side of each seven-point scale. Captions describing the individuals depicted in the slides were printed at the top of the person perception forms. Underneath was the question, "How do you feel the individual(s) listed above is (are) presented in this slide?" The slide evaluation forms were not captioned and had the question "How do you feel about this slide as a whole?" printed above the set of scales. d) Critical review Three lecturers at Moray House College of Education involved in multicultural and antiracist education reviewed the proposed list of adjective scales. They agreed that to the best of their knowledge the terms appeared to be relevant to the stimulus material and to the guidelines presented in the literature pertaining to this subject area. They were familiar with the slides selected for analysis and recommended their use as being highly representative of such materials. 2. Procedures Each subject received a booklet in which to rate the four slides. Booklets were made up a cover page containing instructions, eight semantic differential forms, a / 84 list of unsealed bipolar adjective pairs for discussion after the slide presentation. [See Appendix B for instructions and semantic differential forms.] Two forms of the booklet were prepared: one with the treatment labels "Native Plantation Worker", "Moslem Rice Planters", "Woman Tea Picker", and "Brasilian Agricultural Inspectors"; the other with the control lables "Plantation Worker", "Rice Planters", "Tea Picker", and "Agricultural Inspectors". Directions for rating the slides were given using a sample slide. The subjects were informed that the terms which could be considered positive were not necessarily in the same column and that each pair of adjectives was to be considered separately. The slides were projected sequentially onto a screen at the front of the classroom, with the students seated as they would normallj' be for a regular class lecture. The subjects were asked to assess the material as if previewing it before possible use in a classroom situation and to complete the forms quickly, giving their first impressions. Each slide was projected until all of the subjects completed the relevant semantic differential forms. For each visual stimulus the subjects questions at the top of the semantic judgements of: a) the manner in which the person(s). were portrayed in the slide, and b) each slide as a whole. were requested to read the labels and differential forms and to indicate their identified at the top of the first form A ten minute discussion followed on the relevance of the concepts and the scales selected, and the subjects marked the unsealed adjective pairs which they felt were relevant in general to the slides presented. 3 . Scoring procedures Subjects rated the stimulus concepts by checking a point representing the direction and intensity of their reactions on each of the seven-step adjective scales provided. / 85 4. Results a) Amount of time required The subjects required approximate^' 1.5 minutes to complete each 20-scale form. Including the time for setting up and introducing the material, the experiment itself took about 25 minutes to administer. b) Relevance of concepts and scales During the posttest discussion, the subjects agreeed that they would use such materials in the context of multicultural and development education and felt overall that the scales selected were relevant to the concepts presented. As twenty minutes had been set aside from the regular class time for the administration of the final semantic differential tests, both forms were reduced to 15 items each. Person presentation scales considered non-applicable by more than two subjects were eliminated. None of the slide evaluation scales had been rated N A . If a concept was rated neutrally along an adjective scale (mean rating greater than 3.5 and less than 4.5) then that scale was not considered specifically relevant to the presented stimulus and was also eliminated. Some adjective scales were added to the original selection and some were modified on the basis of the responses to the unsealed adjective pairs provided at the end of the booklet. Some irrelevant scales were retained as embedding scales. APPENDIX B Semantic differential test 86 Front Cover - Instructions Name: Age Sex: Course & year: You are selecting slides in preparation for a Primary 6/7 Environmental Studies project on foreign economic plants. Indicate your reactions to a) the way the individuals are presented in each slide, and b) each slide as a whole. ' 4 ' is neutral. The more you mark to the left of ' 4 ' , the more you agree with the value on the left; the more you mark to the right of ' 4 ' , the more you agree with the value on the right. Example: SLIDE to be shown a) OLIVE GROVE OWNER How is the individual above presented in this slide? The individual appears... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 rich poor sad . . . . . . . happy b) How do you feel about this slide as a whole? The slide appears... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 correct • . incorrect stimulating boring Semantic Differential for Person Presentation NATIVE PLANTATION WORKER Haw i s t h e i n d i v i d u a l l i s t e d a bove p r e s e n t e d i n t h i s s l i d e ? The i n d i v i d u a l a p p e a r s . > . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 s u p e r 1or d e p e n d e n t i nd i v i d u a l i s t i c p a s s i v e power*u1 p r i m i t i v e kriow 1 erjg>ab I e e x p e r t s u b o r d i n a t e s k i l f u l f r ee weak i r r e s p o n s i b 1 e con t e n t e d s u c c e s s f u l i nf e r i o r i n d e p e n d e n t s t e r e o t y p i c a c t i v e power 1 e s s a d v a n c e d i g n o r a n t i n e x p e r t d omlnant u n s k i 1 1 e d sub j u g a t e d s t r o n g r e s p a n s i b1e d i s c o n t e n t e d u n s u c c e s s f u l / 39 Semantic Differential for Slide Evaluation SLIDE i How do y o u -feel a b o u t t h i s s l i d e a s a w h o l e ? The s l i d e a p p e a r s . . . 1 2 3 4 3 6 7 a c c u r a t e i n a p p r o p p i a t e n o n - s t e r e o t y p i n g t r a d i t i o n a l a t t r a c t i v e i n t e r e s t i ng r ac i s t use-f u l u n o H e n s i ve p a s s i v e a u t - o + - d a t e norma 1 bad s t r o n g sex i s t I n a c c u r a t e a p p r o p r i a t e s t e r e o t y p i ng p r o g r e s s i v e u n a t t r a c t i ve un i n t e r e s t i n g n o n - r a c i s t use 1 e s s of-fens i ve a c t i ve u p - t o - d a t e u n u s u a l good weak non-sex i s t APPENDIX C Reliability analysis 90 L E R T A P SUBTEST 1 PERSON PERCEPTION NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS • MEAN STANDARD DEVIATION NUMBER OF ITEMS HIGHEST SCORE LOWEST SCORE SOURCE OF VARIANCE O.F. S.S. M.S. INDIVIDUALS 25.00 101.59 4.OS ITEMS 10.00 207.19 20.72 RESIDUAL 250.00 219.18 0.88 TOTAL 285.00 527.9G 1.85 HOYT ESTIMATE OF RELIABILITY SUBTEST 2 SLIDE EVALUATION NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS • 26.00 MEAN - 46.19 STANDARD DEVIATION - 7.73 NUMBER OF ITEMS HIGHEST SCORE LOWEST SCORE SOURCE OF VARIANCE O.F. S.S. M.S. INDIVIDUALS 25.00 114.77 4.59 ITEMS 12.00 325.35 27.11 RESIDUAL 300.00 311.42 1.04 TOTAL 337.00 751.54 2.23 HOYT ESTIMATE OF RELIABILITY - 0.77 / 92 LERTAP TOTAL TEST STATISTICS NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS 26.00 NUMBER OF ITEMS 24.00 MEAN 91 .50 HIGHEST SCORE 110.00 STANDARD DEVIATION 10. 34 LOWEST SCORE 75.00 SOURCE OF VARIANCE D.F. S.S. INDIVIDUALS 25.00 111.27 ITEMS 23.00 582.10 RESIDUAL 575.00 635.69 TOTAL 623.00 1329.07 M.S. 4 .45 25.31 1.11 2. 13 HOYT ESTIMATE OF RELIABILITY 0.75 NO. SUBTESTS WITH NON-ZERO WT = 2.00 APPENDIX D Cluster analysis 93 Cluster Analysis - UBC CGP Person Presentation Scales ITEMS GROUPED STEP ERROR 10 1 1 * 1 5 68874 * 2 9 31765 * 3 10 39997 * 4 13 97252 5 14 35541 * 6 16 91348 * 7 19 03747 * 8 25 71812 * 9 35 86001 * 10 134 73080 * * * IT T 1 S c a l e it S c a l e Terms 1 super 1 o r / 1 n f e r i o r 2 Independent/dependent 3 powerful/power 1 ess 4 advanced/backward 5 know 1edgeable/ignorant 6 e x p e r t / i n e x p e r t 7 dominant/subordinate 8 s k i l f u l / u n s k i l l e d 9 f r e e / s u b j u g a t e d 10 r e s p o n s i b l e / I r r e s p o n s i b l e 11 s u c c e s s f u l / u n s u c c e s s f u l Cluster Analysis - UBC CGP Slide Evaluation Scales STEP ERROR 1 5 27147 * 2 5 74529 * 3 8 0031 1 * 4 9 00782 * 5 9 29803 * 6 10 54034 * 7 13 62229 * 8 14 31672 * 9 18 99644 * 10 28 28752 * 1 1 60 58459 * 12 154 32278 * * * ITEMS GROUPED 11 12 13 8 LI 10 Scale H Scale Terms 1 accurate/fnaccurate 2 appropr1 ate/1nappropr1 ate 3 non-stereotyping/stereotyp1ng 4 progressive/traditional 5 attractive/unattractive 6 interesting/uninteresting 7 non-racist/racist 8 useful/useless 9 unof f ensl ve/of f ensive 10 up-to-date/out-of-date 11 normal/unusual 12 good/bad 13 non-sex 1st/sex1st APPENDIX E T test 96 T Test for Independent Pairs C l u s t e r Treatment Mean T - v a l u e 2 - t a l l P r o b a b i l i t y 1 N e u t r a l 4.82 0.29 0.777 1 Loaded 4.72 2 N e u t r a l 4.75 2.53 0.019* 2 Loaded 4.12 3 N e u t r a l 4.05 2.52 0.019* 3 Loaded 3.00 df=24 A P P E N D I X F Experimental materials 98 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0054533/manifest

Comment

Related Items