Overview of the Critical Manipulations in Each Experiment
| . | Objectives . | Procedure . | Task . | Sti. . | Baseline Pupil Response Pattern Caused by Sequential Luminance Contrast Change . |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| E1 | To examine how the pupil responds to attractiveness. | Participants made the judgment of an image while their pupillary responses were recorded. | Att., Rnd. | FC, GF | Pupil constriction to FC, pupil dilation to GF. |
| E2 | To replicate the result of E1 by using equal luminance images. | Same as E1 | Att., Rnd. | FC (eql), NS (eql) | Pupil constriction to both FC and NS (even when the mean luminance change is equated). |
| E3 | To examine whether stimulus presentation duration affects the result. | Participants viewed the image for 5 sec and held their response until the stimulus was off. | Att. | FC (eql) | Pupil constriction to FC (even when the mean luminance change is equated). |
| E4 | (1) To examine whether task demand affects the result. (2) To minimize the effect of stimulus luminance on pupils. | Same as E3, or just viewing the stimulus for 5 sec without judgment. | Att., Pas. | FC (line) | Pupil constriction to FC in both Att. and Pas. (slightly) conditions. |
| E5 | To examine whether baseline pupil response pattern affects the result. | Same as E1 | Att. | FC, GF | Pupil dilation to FC, pupil constriction to GF. |
| E6 | To examine whether implicit pupil size manipulation contributes to attractiveness. | Same as E1 | Att. | FC | The amount of pupil size change was manipulated. |
| E7 | To rule out the confounding of sequential luminance contrast in E6. | Same as E1 | Att. | FC | The amount of pupil size change was equated while the sequential luminance contrast change was manipulated. |
| . | Objectives . | Procedure . | Task . | Sti. . | Baseline Pupil Response Pattern Caused by Sequential Luminance Contrast Change . |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| E1 | To examine how the pupil responds to attractiveness. | Participants made the judgment of an image while their pupillary responses were recorded. | Att., Rnd. | FC, GF | Pupil constriction to FC, pupil dilation to GF. |
| E2 | To replicate the result of E1 by using equal luminance images. | Same as E1 | Att., Rnd. | FC (eql), NS (eql) | Pupil constriction to both FC and NS (even when the mean luminance change is equated). |
| E3 | To examine whether stimulus presentation duration affects the result. | Participants viewed the image for 5 sec and held their response until the stimulus was off. | Att. | FC (eql) | Pupil constriction to FC (even when the mean luminance change is equated). |
| E4 | (1) To examine whether task demand affects the result. (2) To minimize the effect of stimulus luminance on pupils. | Same as E3, or just viewing the stimulus for 5 sec without judgment. | Att., Pas. | FC (line) | Pupil constriction to FC in both Att. and Pas. (slightly) conditions. |
| E5 | To examine whether baseline pupil response pattern affects the result. | Same as E1 | Att. | FC, GF | Pupil dilation to FC, pupil constriction to GF. |
| E6 | To examine whether implicit pupil size manipulation contributes to attractiveness. | Same as E1 | Att. | FC | The amount of pupil size change was manipulated. |
| E7 | To rule out the confounding of sequential luminance contrast in E6. | Same as E1 | Att. | FC | The amount of pupil size change was equated while the sequential luminance contrast change was manipulated. |
Att. = attractiveness task; Rnd. = roundness task; Pas. = passive viewing; Sti. = stimuli; FC = faces; GF = geometric figures; NS = natural scenes; eql = equal luminance; line = line drawing.