IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0176030.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Looking at reality versus watching screens: Media professionalization effects on the spontaneous eyeblink rate

Author

Listed:
  • Celia Andreu-Sánchez
  • Miguel Ángel Martín-Pascual
  • Agnès Gruart
  • José María Delgado-García

Abstract

This article explores whether there are differences in visual perception of narrative between theatrical performances and screens, and whether media professionalization affects visual perception. We created a live theatrical stimulus and three audio-visual stimuli (each one with a different video editing style) having the same narrative, and displayed them randomly to participants (20 media professionals and 20 non-media professionals). For media professionals, watching movies on screens evoked a significantly lower spontaneous blink rate (SBR) than looking at theatrical performances. Media professionals presented a substantially lower SBR than non-media professionals when watching screens, and more surprisingly, also when seeing reality. According to our results, media professionals pay higher attention to both screens and the real world than do non-media professionals.

Suggested Citation

  • Celia Andreu-Sánchez & Miguel Ángel Martín-Pascual & Agnès Gruart & José María Delgado-García, 2017. "Looking at reality versus watching screens: Media professionalization effects on the spontaneous eyeblink rate," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(5), pages 1-9, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0176030
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0176030
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0176030
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0176030&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0176030?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0176030. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.