PSYC3002 Independent Study - 12006955

1
How do university students perceive words and images in a timed task?
Hayley Gibson
12006955
Independent Study submitted as a requirement for the
B.Sc (Hons) degree in Major Psychology with Minor Sociology
at the University of Worcester
May 2015

2
Table of Contents
Abstract...........................................................................................................................3
Introduction....................................................................................................................4
Methods ....................................................................................................................... 17
Design....................................................................................................................... 17
Participants ............................................................................................................. 17
Materials & Procedure.......................................................................................... 17
Ethics........................................................................................................................ 19
Results ......................................................................................................................... 21
Discussion................................................................................................................... 23
References.................................................................................................................. 30
Appendix...................................................................................................................... 35

3
Abstract
A quantitative investigation was conducted to measure if university students’ implicit and
explicit perceptions of the learning disability Dyslexia correspond or differ. 104 students
participated inthe study with ages ranging from 18 to 44. 61 participants were female
and 43 males. Participants completed a questionnaire adapted from Hornstra,
Denessen, Bakker, van den Bergh and Voeten, (2010), which measured their explicit
attitude. They then completed the Gibson Implicit Attitude Test (2015) to measure their
implicit attitude.
A correlational and paired sample t test analysis of the data gathered found a
significant difference as participants’ explicit scores were significantly less than their
implicit scores. Thus the participants do hold negative stereotypical perceptions of
dyslexia moreover they tried to disguise their true beliefs. This gives an insight into why
individuals with dyslexia still express feelings of discrimination even though recent
studies such as Wadlington, Elliot and Kirylo (2008) and Mortimore (2012), suggest a
decline in the stereotypes. This impacts on the way future studies should be conducted
to gain a valid and holistic view of the stereotype. As seen in this study, by just using
explicit measurements, it does not gain the true beliefs of the participant.

4
Introduction
Stereotypes, and the stigma that is attached to particular stereotyped
groups, are still present in individual’s beliefs today. Pelley et al. (2010)
describe stereotypes as beliefs that particular traits, or behaviour dispositions,
are shared by members of the same social group. Lippmann (1922) gave an
insight into describing them as being generalizations about a social group that
are rigidly held, illogically created and incorrect. It highlights the idea that these
views are not always based on fact and are confidently held. Rarely does an
individual change their mind on their views on the stereotype, nor admit they
could be wrong. Hilton & Von Hippel (1996) describe that stereotypes are
created and maintained through cognitive and motivational processes. These
are due to individuals having primed categories about certain social groups or
characteristics of individuals. This means that only select information about an
individual is remembered, which tends to be the information that feeds the
stereotype. Macrae, Milne, and Bodenhausen (1994) support this by describing
stereotypes as cognitive shortcuts that act as energy saving functions. When
meeting an individual, instead of having to take in all the information, they use
past beliefs (stereotypes) to speed up the decision making process.
Stereotypes are paired commonly with particular social stigma.
According to Goffman (1963), stigma greatly discredits the individual, it makes
an individual feel tainted and discounted as a human being, not as an equal
member of society. With this in mind, not surprisingly, stigmas have been linked
to poor mental and physical health, academic underachievement, lower social
status, infant mortality, poverty and reduced ability to access housing, education
and employment (Yinger 1994). As well as this, the American Heart Association
(2003) compared individuals in stigmatized groups and non-stigmatized groups
and found that the stigmatized groups were at a higher risk of developing such
conditions as depression, hypertension, coronary heart disease and strokes.
These definitions, and the implications of them, indicate that the individual who
is suffering from being stereotyped and stigmatized has an attribute that marks

5
them as being different from others. The attribute the individual has is then
associated with discrediting dispositions. These individuals can then be
excluded, or avoided, by members of different societies than their own. The
stigma does not come from the individual rather it is related to the meaning that
is placed on that attribute by society (Major & O’Brien, 2005). Crocker, Major,
and Steele (1998) argued that stigma is a social construct which is able to
change over time and space. It is merely a label attached by the society an
individual lives in.
Stereotypes are ingrained into children at a young age. By the age of ten
most children participating in McKown & Weinstein’s (2003) study were aware
of cultural stereotypes in society and had already began to demonstrate
stereotypical beliefs about stigmatised groups. The children that belonged to the
stigmatized groups were aware of their cultural stereotype by the even younger
age of six. These beliefs then act as a baseline to associate with anyone from
that society, or that holds the attribute, to enable labels to be created and
implemented. Johnstone (1998) described that attaching labels is an
unnecessary and very destructive process, which suggests that only bad can
come from labels and they are never positive and only have a detrimental
impact on the individual. Among educational psychologists there is a strong
belief that labelling children is more harmful than it is beneficial. With the basic
risks, and implications, of the stigmatisation that follows which would negatively
impact on the child owing to the negative expectations placed on them when
given the label. Riddick (2000) describes that labelling is more complex than
just being good or bad. There are different aspects to what makes a label and
the implications that follow.
Some of the most common stereotypes that have been documented in
today’s society are ones that are commonly attached to being male or female,
as well as to the different ethnicities and cultures a person may be from. Betz
(2013) found that there are stereotypes around what jobs males and females
should do. She found that jobs in the area of science, technology, engineering
and mathematics (STEM) were identified by girls as being much less attainable
than pursuing a career in a humanities subject. This is through their belief that

6
femininity equates to an inability to work in certain jobs (Betz, 2013) leading to
the idea that STEM jobs are for males and only males can complete in these
areas. This could lead to discrimination, based on these stereotypes, against
women going for job interviews or lead to women themselves purposely
choosing different careers due to their belief that they are not good enough for
STEM work (Betz, 2013). This is developed further by Davis (2014) who found
that Caucasian women were impacted the most owing to how few of them there
were in STEM jobs, however, Davis (2014) also found that African American
women were not as affected by the stereotype as they had a higher amount of
women in STEM jobs and more were aspiring towards these. This could
indicate that the stereotypes are present across ethnicities, but are not as
influential in some as others. This could highlight that some ethnicities hold the
stereotypes more deeply than others.
This continues on with stereotypes around social class. Bennett (2013)
found that a person’s social class and family income influenced how intelligent
that person was perceived to be. If a person is identified as belonging to the
working class who has a low income, they are perceived as being unintelligent.
Bennett (2013) continues this by suggesting that no other factors were taken
into consideration. Family circumstances were not a factor into deciding if
someone was unintelligent, that decision was made purely on their social class.
This implies that the stereotypes are very powerful in making judgments about
individuals. A person may have a very high IQ, however if they have had to go
out to work so their family can eat, that would mean that to the rest of society,
they are unintelligent.
A less researched stereotype, is around the learning disability dyslexia.
This study will investigate whether the stigma is still present in today’s society.
Dyslexia is the most common learning disability in the United Kingdom and
United States, (Nalavany & Carawan, 2011). The British Dyslexia Association
(2015) defines dyslexia as a learning difficulty that primarily affects the skills
involved in the accurate and fluent spelling and reading of words. The concept
dyslexia originates from the Greek language meaning difficulty with words (The

7
British Dyslexia Association, 2015). Dyslexia is a lifelong genetic condition
which affects around 10% of the UK’s population. Dyslexia has no relationship
with intelligence, race, gender, culture or age. Dyslexia impairs the processing
and recalling of information that individuals see and or hear. This then has a
negative impact on their ability to learn (British Dyslexia Association, 2015).
Dyslexia can be related to dyspraxia, dyscalculia and attention deficit
hyperactivity disorder. Individuals with dyslexia often have strong creative,
visual and problem solving skills. They are highly represented among
entrepreneurs, inventors, architects, engineers and in the performing arts and
entertainment industry (British Dyslexia Association, 2015).
Dyslexia was first recognised in the Disability Discrimination Act (1995)
and is still specifically noted in the Equality Act 2010. As a result, there has to
be provisions made in the workplace and educational institutions for individuals
with dyslexia and these individuals are not to be placed at a disadvantage when
compared to others who do not have the disability. With this in mind, education
has been seen to meet this requirement as most children with dyslexia in
England and Ireland remain in mainstream education, with varying levels of
individual support (Bell, McPhillips & Doveston, 2011). Tunmer and Greaney
(2009) described that diagnosing a child with dyslexia does not imply that they
will never be able to read, but will need more support and intense instruction on
a longer basis than other children.
With this in mind, it poses the question of what, if any, are the
stereotypes around people with dyslexia. Elliott (2005) states that children who
are diagnosed with dyslexia are stereotyped as not being able to read, write,
spell and struggle with their speech and organisational skills. These are not all
present in children with dyslexia and are not an accurate and factual
representation of the obstacles children with the disability have to face (Elliott,
2005). He argues that these problems are not just experienced by children with
dyslexia and others are immune from them as children without the disability can
have these problems as well. But the stereotype is that if these problems arise,

8
you must have the disability, there is no other reason. These labels are
subjective and are not solely true for everyone with dyslexia, nor, as Elliott
(2005) states, is it true that only dyslexic children can suffer from these
problems. Moreover, children may be given the label of being a poor reader
when that may not be the part of the disability that they struggle with. Riddick
(2000) supported this by stating that participants in their study reported being
labelled at some time in their life as being lazy, stupid and careless, based on
their disability of dyslexia. Gilleies (2005) conducted a similar study and found
that almost all of the parents that participated in the study held the belief that if
you have dyslexia then you are not intelligent as it was considered that a child
could not be intelligent and have dyslexia. Whereas some also expressed that
they wanted their child to be diagnosed with the disability as it meant that they
were seen as being special, not slow. This meant that if they had dyslexia then
that was the reason why their child was not academically achieving, not
because they were unintelligent (Gilleies, 2005). This suggests that the label of
dyslexia means that any difficulties are not the child’s fault but because of their
dyslexia. This is not the case, however, as it has been shown that intelligence
has no relationship with the disability (Gilleies, 2005). Some of Gilleies’
participants also expressed that they felt their parents never held high hopes for
them achieving in education because of their dyslexia, therefore, they put less
emphasis on achievement (Gilleies, 2005). Children with dyslexia need more
support than other children but, with their needs met, can achieve at the highest
levels in education (Gilleies, 2005).
However, there have been other studies that have found parents do have
the correct attitude towards their child having dyslexia as Elliott & Place (2004)
found that parents pushed for their child to be diagnosed because they saw it as
a positive label. They knew that their child was intelligent, but they just struggled
with aspects of their dyslexia. They expressed that, with the diagnosis, the label
would change them from being seen as dumb to being intelligent but impaired.
They do not view it as having a negative impact on the child but as being able to
have their child’s extra needs met by education so they can demonstrate their
true academic ability. Carugati (1990) supports this by finding that 90% of the

9
mothers in their study described the feeling of being relieved when their child
was diagnosed with dyslexia. They expressed how their child was previously
viewed as being unintelligent but, following the diagnosis of a disability, an
exploration into why they were achieving what they were, helped to put them at
ease. They expressed that their desire was to have the appropriate adjustments
put into place to make sure their child would have a fair and equal chance to
achieve.
It must be noted that not all studies have found such negative findings for
how people view dyslexia. Paradice (2001) found that even fourteen years ago
beliefs were starting to change about this learning disability. It was found that
parents held very positive beliefs about their child’s intelligence, as well as
disagreeing strongly with the stereotype that their child was unintelligent,
illiterate and would have limited ability to achieve. Wadlington, Elliot and Kirylo
(2008) described a teaching technique implemented on undergraduate students
who were considering a career in teaching. This technique is a simulation task
which enables the participant to walk in the shoes of a child with dyslexia and
feel the difficulties they feel. This allowed all the students to gain a holistic view
on the disability and all the components that affect an individual. 100% of the
students expressed it as being a useful teaching tool and gained much from the
simulation. This is an encouraging move to reduce the amount of ill-informed
negative stereotypes formed about dyslexia, the effects of which can be seen in
Mortimore (2012) study. It was found that in the education system there has
been a positive move for lecturers encouraging and actively working towards
inclusivity in their class. Once they had an understanding of the facts and how
to incorporate them into the classroom, it enabled them to help the student to
academic success. Also their peers showed a good foundation level of
knowledge about the disability and were open and willing to support the
individual as well as giving them the respect they deserved. This could be an
indicator of what a positive role model can do in education. Teaching their
pupils by observing their positively to the disability they then internalise these
beliefs and act in a similarly positive way to the disability. This is being seen
more and more in education throughout the country.

10
This leads to the question as to who holds these stereotypes. Woods
(1998) described that people have their own independent views on how children
with dyslexia should be treated in education. There are three important systems
in an individual’s life, family, peers and education. Leavett, Nash and Snowling
(2014) found that parents of children with dyslexia hold such stereotypes. They
identified that they believed if someone had poor literacy skills that means they
would have dyslexia, ignoring all other aspects of the disability. They identified
with the stereotype of people with dyslexia not being able to read or write.
Natale et al. (2008) also found that parents that had a child with a risk of
dyslexia expressed that their child’s academic failure was due to their lack of
ability, not their lack of effort, the opposite was found the in the control group.
Also parents expressed little confidence in their child being able to succeed,
even decreasing throughout primary school, where in the control group parents
expressed higher positive ability attributes to their children.
The educational system, however, should uphold a non-stereotypical
approach to dyslexia which is consistent throughout the country. Riddick (1995)
talked to parents of children with dyslexia and found that some schools felt that
dyslexia was not a medical disability and believed that it is another way of
saying that the child is “thick.” Parents had difficulties finding a school who
would take dyslexia seriously as 65% of the parents found that the schools just
dismissed the label and said their child is not intelligent. This shows that some
people do not take the disability seriously and labelled the child as unintelligent.
Riddick (1995) found that in 15 cases, only 1 school offered the correct support
(based on literature such as Prevett, Bell and Ralph (2013)) in the other 14
cases no support was given. This meant that children continued education at a
disadvantage, due to the stereotype the school held. Nickerson (1998)
supported this by finding that teachers’ judgements of pupils’ writing
achievement differed based on the stereotypes they held. If they held the
negative stereotype of dyslexia, they unfairly graded the child lower. As a result,
a confirmation bias is created, which indicates that students with dyslexia were
being discriminated against. This is further supported by Hornstra, Denessen,

11
Bakker, van den Bergh and Voeten, (2010) as they found similar results as
teachers’ expectations of achievement for children with dyslexia were affected
by their negative views on the disability. They held the implicit belief that
students with dyslexia cannot achieve as much as other students. This leads to
them unconsciously making less effort with these students. This may not have
been their intention but, through their deep-rooted stereotypical views, the
students’ needs were not met, nor were they given an equal opportunity to
succeed.
Finally, stereotypes can be observed through peer relationships. Riddick
(2000) found that children felt stigmatised by other children because of visible
symptoms, such as difficulty spelling or writing. Many of them also internalised
these negative evaluations of themselves and described their feelings of shame
and self-denigration in the school environment.
With all this in mind, the impact stereotypes can have is huge.
Macdonald (2010) focused on the psychological impact and found that being
diagnosed with dyslexia could also affect an individual’s employment
opportunities as they felt that if they revealed that they were dyslexic this would
open them up to ridicule. It is noted that the participants in Macdonald’s (2010)
study felt that the stereotype had greater impact on their employment than their
education. They also felt that the weight of the stigma was big enough to
overshadow any other achievement. They are just labelled dyslexic, and not
seen as the individual behind the label. Tanner (2009) explained that
participants in their sample were ‘closet’ dyslexics (hid their disability) due to the
fear of stigmatisation and discrimination. They developed compensatory
strategies to hide their difficulties from society, for example, paying for a private
tutor to aid them throughout education to minimise their visible symptoms.
Without their tutors, they felt they would have failed in education. This indicates
that participants would rather spend their money than allow other people to
know they have dyslexia thus the fear of the stigma attached to dyslexia is
bigger than psychologists once thought (Tanner, 2009). Students expressed
that they felt that teachers classed them as being dumb and overlooked them in

12
the class room setting. This would lead to the students feeling forgotten about,
which lowered their self-esteem (Tanner, 2009). As suggested by the self-
fulfilling prophecy, the students internalised this label and sought different
avenues for self-worth and confidence and some fell into anti-social behaviour
(Rekdal, 2014). This is further supported by Humphrey (2003) identifying that
children with dyslexia have self-esteem problems, while trying to develop
interventions to improve both their ability and self-esteem. As Thomas (2003)
argues, this is an internal oppression, they feel powerless which then develops
into a negative view of themselves. Tanner (2009) goes on to describe how the
participants expressed being bullied by peers and ‘set up for falls’ in the work
place. They became a laughing stock, an office idiot that is the butt of all jokes.
This is continued into family dynamics as one’s father was described as using
physical and emotional punishments towards them for their lack of educational
achievement. Despite the parent being aware of their child’s dyslexia, the lack
of understanding shown to them led the participant to feel worthless and have
suicidal thoughts, all because of a lack of understanding of, and support for,
their learning disability. With such severe impacts on people’s emotional and
physical wellbeing, this is an important topic to keep researching to help
educate society and prevent such negative stereotypes. With this in mind,
Evans (2013) argues that it is to no surprise that his participants try to hide their
disability and fail to disclose it to employers, colleagues, education and peers.
A key area of research is the point that stereotypes start to form an
individual’s beliefs and whether there a point where education of the facts about
dyslexia can change them. Continually as to the idea that the level of education
that people receive give them an ability to assess the facts of dyslexia to form a
correct understanding, or does it have no influence on whether or not
stereotypes form. May and Stone (2010) conducted research that would
suggest education level has no impact on this. They found that there were still
negative stereotypes present in children older than secondary school age.
These views are particularly found in university and college settings. This
supports the previous research of Bogdanowicz (1996), in Poland, which

13
systematically surveyed the understanding of the term dyslexia by different
members of the public, including various professional groups, and found that
the best informed group were parents of dyslexic children, rather than
educationalists. This finding may not seem surprising, but it does highlight an
issue over the ownership of labels and who has the right to suggest their usage.
Tomlinson (1993) suggests that over the last 20 years professionals have
gained unprecedented power in the area of special needs and that the voices of
other groups, such as parents, are rarely heard.
This study will investigate into whether the stigma is still present in
today’s society and will differ from previous research in that it will take a
quantitative approach to data collection. Most of the research conducted into
this area uses focus groups or interviews which may not provide the most
reliable data. This approach is supported by Regan & Woods (2000) who
suggest that any future research in this area could usefully look at the views of
a wider group of education and incorporate quantitative data analysis. Dyson
(2003) stated that the more controversial the topic is, the more participants are
likely to lie, as well as there being the potential for social desirability to affect
responses. This study will, therefore, have higher levels of anonymity, which
decreases the chance of social desirability.
There is a gap in the research as to whether or not particular social
groups are more likely to hold the stereotypes. There is considerable research
into how stereotypes impact on the individual so it would be worth researching
into who holds these stereotypes so that education can be targeted
appropriately. Riddick (2000) described that people with dyslexia support there
being more education in society to remove the stereotypes and for society to
have a more positive perspective on dyslexia. University students will have
been educated to a high level thus may have a good understanding of society
and dyslexia, however studies such as Hornstra et al. (2010) suggests that the
education system itself reinforces the negative stereotypes attached to dyslexia
so these may still be held despite the time students will have spent in education.

14
What will set this study apart from previous research is the use of implicit
and explicit attitudes. Implicit attitudes are described as being an individual’s
core beliefs that are accessed automatically without the individual being aware
(Rudman, Phelan & Heppen, 2007). Stier and Hinshaw (2007) continue this by
identifying that implicit attitudes are automatic, intuitive and subconscious. They
then go on to explain how explicit attitudes are an individual’s conscious beliefs
and that they can control what they believe and express, which is reflective of
themselves.
Measuring individuals’ implicit attitudes can be troublesome, however,
Greenwald, McGhee, Sherry, and Schwartz (1998) created the Implicit Attitudes
Test to do so effectively. This form of data collection, and method, has been
tried and tested over many different areas of psychology. Monteith and Pettit
(2011) conducted an implicit and explicit study into individuals’ attitudes towards
depression. They found that what participants were consciously saying was not
matching their unconscious beliefs. This meant that they were lying on the
explicit measure due to social desirability about the sensitive research area.
They concluded that it was important to use implicit measures in stigma related
research, such as this. Carlsson and Björklund’s (2010) research also found
that implicit results showed up a favouritism for the particular professional
stereotypes they held. These results were not highlighted in the explicit
methods. Fernández, Quiroga, Escorial, and Privado. (2014) further used this
method to explore if there are still stereotypical gender role attitudes or has
there been a move towards more equality. Through the implicit attitudes the
results showed that there has been little change in attitudes and the
stereotypical gender role attitudes are still present.
Cvencek, Meltzoff and Greenwald (2011) found that it can also be used
to investigate such things as the stereotypes around gender and mathematical
ability. This stereotype is severely socialised into children as young as second
grade in that girls scored themselves lower on mathematical ability on both
explicit and implicit measures than the boys did. At that age there are no actual
differences in mathematical achievement. This shows the implications and

15
impact that stereotypes can have on everyone, starting younger and younger.
To relate to the current study, Rohmer and Louvet (2012) found that individuals
viewed people with disabilities at an implicit level as being incompetent, cold-
hearted, unfriendly people. Without society viewing the broad umbrella term of
disability negatively, does this intensify when specific disabilities are
researched? This will be explored within this study.
To gain the most holistic results on this topic, as suggested by Steinhart
(2012), implicit and explicit measures will be used. This could highlight whether
more people hold the negative views than are willing to express them to
researchers freely. This would give a better representation of the level of
stereotypes still present in society. It would also highlight that a person can hold
these views and not even be aware that they have these cognitive priming
stereotypes thus, if they were only questioned in an interview or focus group,
their responses would be misleading. Therefore, this research will aim to see
the true picture of the stigma that surrounds dyslexia.
For the implicit measure, a primary tailor-made timed priming task has
been created called the Gibson Implicit Measure. This will fit directly to the
needs of the research and will gather relevant and accurate data. The explicit
measure has been adapted from the work of Hornstra et al, (2010). Their
questionnaire was adapted to be more relevant and specific to this study. They
conducted an implicit and explicit study on school teachers and their
expectations of achievement levels for their pupils with and without dyslexia.
They found significant variations in their implicit and explicit scores as the
implicit results showed that teachers had significantly lower attainment
expectations for the students with dyslexia compared to their other students.
With all of the past literature taken into account, including how to improve
and build on their findings, a hypothesis was constructed: There will be a
significant difference between conscious scores and unconscious scores for
participants’ views on dyslexia. This hypothesis aims to test whether
participants’ explicit perceptions of dyslexia correspond with their implicit

16
beliefs. This will help to identify if negative stereotypes of dyslexia are
decreasing in society or if they are still strong in the participants’ beliefs. It will
also show if they attempt to hide their true beliefs.

17
Methods
Design
The data was first changed into a percentage score. A Correlational
analysis was first used followed by a Pared Sample T-Test. This is because
there are two key scores from the study. One being the explicit level of
stereotypes held in relation to dyslexia, the other being their implicit levels. This
analysis will allow the researcher to see if the two scores are related to each.
Then to further investigate whether they correspond or differ in a positive or
negative way. Through this analysis the hypothesis will be fully tested.
Participants
A volunteer sample has been used to recruit participants. The study was
be made up of 104 students from the University of Worcester, 61 of whom were
female and 43 male. Their ages ranged from 18 to 44, with a mean age of 23.5
years. The study was advertised and conducted during lecture times. It was
also advertised on social media, such as Facebook, to achieve the 104
volunteers for the study. 20 Research credits were offered to the psychology
students for participation.
Materials & Procedure
The first measure used was a questionnaire adapted from a study
conducted by Hornstra et al, (2010). They designed their questionnaire from the
Heyman (1990) Self-Perception of a Learning Disability Scale. This was chosen
as it gained insightful and holistic results. Heyman (1990) created the
questionnaire about general learning disability, but Hornstra et al (2010)
adapted it to measure perceptions of dyslexia among teachers in mainstream
schools. The questionnaire was then adapted further to make it suitable for the
present study (see appendix 2). Questions were altered to gather information
tailored to university students. The questions also addressed how much the
participants believed they knew about dyslexia. This then allowed comparisons
on the levels of negative stereotypes compared to perceived level of

18
knowledge. This measure formed the explicit half of the study. The second half
of the study gathered the implicit data. The experiment was created by the
researcher to be tailored primarily to the study. As the study is very specific it
was decided that having a primary source of measurement would be the most
effective way of addressing the research question and hypothesis. The
experiment was named the Gibson Implicit Measure. It was a priming task
which measured the implicit attitudes towards dyslexia of the participants. It was
based on studies that used Implicit Attitudes Test which were first introduced by
Greenwald, McGhee, Sherry, and Schwartz (1998). The experiment used in this
study was conducted by an image, or text item, being shown in the centre of the
screen with a focus point of 0.1 second (see appendix 3). The participants were
given a response sheet on which they had to circle, or underline (see appendix
4), which side of the screen showed the stimuli they felt was associated with the
image or text. There were two categories on the screen, one on the left and the
other on the right. These consisted of a practice made up of animals and plants.
There were then four conditions which were made up of five stimuli in each. The
stimuli had been chosen based on the stereotypes identified from previous
literature. The four conditions consisted of these categories: Positive and
Negative, Dyslexia and Normal (for the purposes of this study, normal was
described to the participants as being someone without dyslexia), Positive &
Normal and Negative & Dyslexia, finally the last condition was Positive &
Dyslexia and Negative & Normal. There was a two second interval between the
stimuli which ran independently to guarantee equal time spent on each to avoid
bias. The amount of time was chosen so the participants had to use their
cognitive primed categories, as there was not sufficient time to be able to think
thus amend their true thoughts. This method was used as other experiments
have shown it to be an effective way of gaining the implicit views of individuals
as it measures beliefs participants may not know they hold. In addition, as the
topic can be seen as controversial, the participants would have been more likely
to edit their answers owing to social desirability. This study will therefore gain
the most holistic and valid results possible on the implicit perceptions of
dyslexia.

19
Participants were given the participant information sheet (see appendix
5) and consent form (see appendix 6) before they started the study. They were
then asked to complete the explicit part of the study, (the questionnaire). Once
that was completed, they were then given an answer sheet ready for the implicit
experiment to begin. What they had to do was explained to them and, once they
had read the instructions, they began the Gibson Implicit Measures Test. Once
they had finished they were given their debrief form (see appendix 7) and a
token for their participation credits.
Ethics
The ethical guidelines were followed during the creation of this study and
when it was conducted. The five key requirements were always important
factors in the decision making process. Non-maleficence, Fidelity and
Responsibility, Integrity, Justice and Respect for People's Rights and Dignity
(American Psychological Association, 2015). Steps were taken to make sure no
psychological harm came to the participants. The stimuli were chosen carefully
to make sure there was little to none socially sensitive stimuli. Participants were
also given information to talk about their feelings if they did feel any stress at
several points, including the start and end of the study. The researcher
remained professional throughout, answering any questions. The participants
were given their own packet with everything they needed for the study, this
gave them reassurance of the organization and preparation that went into
developing the study. The participants were not lied to or deceived at any time
and were given the opportunity to ask questions which were honestly answered.
The study was explained in detail in the information sheet and in the debrief
form.
Nevertheless, the topic of the study could be seen as being slightly
controversial. With this in mind, the participants were reassured of their
confidentiality, their name would only be kept on the consent form in a locked
file so they could withdraw from the study if they wished to. They were reminded

20
of their right to withdraw from the study at any point during and up to twenty
eight days afterwards. Informed consent was also gained before the study
began.
Some argue that the topic of dyslexia and individuals’ stereotypes on the
disability can be a controversial topic. As well as this, some participants might
become distressed to know they have unconscious stereotypes of dyslexia
which they might not have been aware of until participating in the study.
However, links and phone numbers were given to all participants on their
debrief form to direct them to professionals that can help them should any
distress be experienced. Full ethical approval was granted for this research by
the supervisor on behalf of the Institute of Health and Society Research Ethics
Committee (see appendix 8 and 9).

21
Results
This study tested the hypothesis that there would be a significant
difference between explicit scores and implicit scores about participants’ views
on dyslexia. Descriptive statistics revealed that the mean score for explicit was
40.71 with a standard deviation of 8.997, while the mean score for implicit was
64.38 with a standard deviation of 13.63. Figure 1 and figure 2 (see appendix
10) revealed that the data was relatively normally distributed and appeared to
be free from outliers. A scatterplot of the scores suggested the presence of a
weak positive relationship between the two variables and suggested the
assumption of linearity had not been significantly violated (see appendix 11). As
the data was collected on two continuous scales, and met the assumptions for
parametric analyses, a Pearson Product Moment correlation was conducted to
determine the strength of this relationship and if it was statistically significant.
Pearson’s Product Moment revealed that there was a positive weak correlation
between scores in explicit and scores in implicit, this was statistically significant
(r (104) =.29, p=.023). This suggests that the two variables are related to one
another, consequently this would give evidence to support the experimental
hypothesis that there would be a significant difference between participants’
explicit scores and implicit scores on their views on dyslexia, however, more
analysis needs to be conducted to measure how they related and if the scores
differ from one another. With this in mind, a Paired Sample T-Test was
conducted next.
A paired samples t-test was performed to assess the hypothesis that
there would be a significant difference between explicit scores and implicit
scores about participants’ views on dyslexia (N=104). Prior to running the t-test,
the data was checked to ensure it was suitable. The Shapiro-Wilk test of
normality revealed that the distribution of recall scores for the explicit (p=.026)
and the implicit (p=.139) indicated that the implicit score significantly deviated
from the normal distribution, however, (see appendix 12), the histograms show
no violation or deviation from the normal distribution from either of the scores.

22
Due to the histograms showing a normally distributed curve, analysing the
results continued (with caution). The results indicated that there was a
statistically significant difference between explicit and implicit scores (t(103)=-
16.581, p<.001 two-tailed). Specifically, scores increased significantly from
explicit to implicit which were higher. The average score for explicit was
40.7051 (SD=8.99686) to an average of 64.3750 scored on the implicit
(SD=13.62977). This supported the hypothesis that there would be a significant
difference between explicit scores and implicit scores about their views on
dyslexia. Specifically, participants’ implicit scores were significantly higher than
their explicit scores.

23
Discussion
The findings of this study suggested that the correlation of the two scores
were related to each other, there is a significant relationship between implicit
perceptions of dyslexia and the explicit perceptions. Further analysis was
required to measure how they are related. The paired sample t test was
conducted to measure whether the hypothesis of: There will be a significant
difference between conscious scores and unconscious scores on participants’
views on dyslexia is correct and in which way will they be different. The results
showed that the participants scored higher levels of negative perceptions about
dyslexia on their implicit scores, compared to their significantly lower explicit
perception score.
The results supports the hypothesis for this study by indicating that the
implicit score demonstrated a higher negative perception of dyslexia than the
explicit score. This suggests that participants lied on their explicit measure. This
could be due to social desirability, owing to them not wanting to look as if they
held any stereotypes or negative views on the disability. There has been a
move in society to reduce discrimination with the ever diverse and changing
society. This is more of an incentive to change now than there has been in the
past, (Moore, 2006). With this pressure to change and adapt, holding a negative
stereotype is seen as not a positive belief to hold (Moore, 2006). Participants
then may have attempted to suppress these to give the appearance of not
holding any negative stigma on individuals with dyslexia, however, this study
indicates through the use of the implicit measure, how what they express to be
how they view the disability, may not be what they are truly feeling.
On the other hand, some of the participants may not have been aware of
their negative perceptions of dyslexia. Due to the nature of this study, which
measures the participants’ unconscious beliefs, they may not have been aware
of holding these core beliefs thus they could have been affecting their
judgement without them being aware. With this in mind, this could explain why
in many studies, such as Tanner (2009) and Evans’ (2013), individuals with
dyslexia are still describing being discriminated against, despite literature that

24
says the stereotype is on the decrease. People may not be aware they are
holding any negativity towards the learning disability and report as much in the
previous studies which only measure their explicit views.
An interesting finding that emerged during analysis of the data was that
more participants were open and honest about their negative views of dyslexia
than previously anticipated as not everyone hid their negative views of dyslexia.
They answered honestly on their negative views and this corresponded to their
high negative views on the implicit scores supporting their views. This could be
due to the lack of education about the learning disability. The individuals
identified with the fictional common stereotypes found in the literature, despite
having come into contact with individuals with dyslexia. This suggests they have
not had any education on what the disability is and believe it is just a term for
lazy, illiterate individuals. There were also four participants that had been
diagnosed with the learning disability. Surprisingly, three of them had a very
negative outlook on the disability, indicating they felt they were unintelligent and
would not make good leaders. This could be a real life example of how the
negative stereotypes can affect an individual’s confidence and self-esteem
when it comes to their academic achievement and ability to strive for leadership
roles. However, one of the four held very positive views on themselves, which
was supported by their implicit score, therefore, this individual has not been
negatively affected by the stereotypes. It would be interesting for further
researchers to investigate into what makes individuals react differently, does,
for example, their personality protect them from the negativity or external
factors, such as family and peer beliefs.
The findings support previous research, such as Steinhart’s (2012),
which highlights the importance of individuals’ implicit beliefs. They state that
implicit motivations are more influential on behaviour than explicit beliefs. This
would support the fact that there are negative beliefs about dyslexia in society
due to the overwhelming amount of negativity held in individuals’ implicit beliefs.
The study would also support the belief that the stereotypes are so debilitating

25
that it is no wonder why people hide this disability, as Tanner (2009) and Evans
(2013) described. The study further supports the work of Hornstra et al, (2010),
as their study found that teachers implicitly labelled dyslexic children as
unintelligent and expected less of them in respect of their academic
achievement. This was a stereotype which was tested in this study and its
findings were consistent with those of Hornstra et al. (2010). Words, such as
unintelligent and dumb were commonly identified as being dyslexic trait rather
than being ones that could also be applied to someone without it. Unfortunately,
as with society, Rekdal, (2014) talked about these stereotypes being
internalised by people with dyslexia. Out of the four cases of people identifying
themselves as having dyslexia in this study, three of them had explicitly
conformed to the stereotype and marked themselves down on ability to be a
leader, intelligence and communication skills. This supports Rekdal’s (2014)
concept of internalising the labels. However it must be noted that one of the
participants did not identify with the stereotypical attributes associated with their
leaning disability. This could highlight a small move forward in society, that one
quarter of the dyslexic participants described themselves in a positive way. This
suggests that either they have a personality which is robust enough not to be
affected by these stereotypes or they are surrounded by a support network that
does not hold these stereotypes and that has been transferred onto her own
perceptions.
Another aspect of this study was whether well-educated university
students would have held a more factual view on dyslexia owing to their higher
number of years spent in education. The findings of this study support the work
of May and Stone (2010) as they found that the stereotypes are found to be
most common in university settings. So, regardless of their academic and
educational level, the negativity towards dyslexia is still present. At a high
educational level, 89 out of 104 participants identified that they have come into
contact with someone with dyslexia. This suggests that even when having
experience of knowing what a person with dyslexia is actually like, the
stereotypes are so influential that they mask any positive qualities the individual
may have. This is further supported by Macdonald (2010) who described how,

26
when applying for a job, employers struggle to look past the stereotypes even
when the applicant is qualified and experienced in the role.
There were, however, some limitations to this study. The Shapiro-Wilk
test of normality indicated that the implicit scores were not normally distributed,
however, the histograms showed that the score did not violate the assumption
as they appeared to be normally distrusted. This could be a result of the two
measures being very different as one was a simple questionnaire and the other
a primed timed task. The reason one could have been normally distributed more
than the other is due to the primed timed task being a harder measure than the
questionnaire and requires a high level of concentration for a set amount of
time. This could be why it initially looked different or why the results may differ
from one another.
Another limitation could be that the participants may have guessed that
the study was about perceptions of dyslexia. This means that demand
characteristics may have affected the results of the explicit scores as they may
have indicated that they have no negative stereotypes as they could have
thought that was the purpose of the study.
The sample used in this study may have affected the results as a student
sample was chosen to see if having a higher level of education would mean that
participants were educated more about the facts of dyslexia which would affect
their responses. This, however, does mean it makes it harder to generalise the
results to the entire population as it lacks generalizable validity due to using a
specific group of the population. Furthermore, due to choosing students, this
limited the age range used in the study as most undergraduates are within the
age range of 18-22. Although extra effort was placed on gaining as many
mature students as possible, the average age in the study was still only 23.51
years old. It would be interesting to know if the findings of this study would be
replicated in middle-age adults and beyond. However, as noted when
conducting the study, the older participants struggled with the implicit measures
test owing to having to concentrate on, and see, the images and text that were

27
shown to them. These factors need to be considered if the research was
conducted with an older age group than undergraduate students.
The final limitation was that not all of the participants conducted the study
in the same conditions and room. Due to the nature of the study the participants
had to meet with the researcher, or the researcher had to go to the participants.
This meant that sometimes the test was conducted in a lecture hall, with
participants surrounded by their peers completing the study at the same time, to
one person in a university room completing it on their own. It is not clear if this
affected the results, however, ideally, all of the participants would have been
tested on the same day, time and place to remove any chance of confounding
variables.
Given the findings of this study and the results supporting the hypothesis,
it is hard to see how society has moved forward in regards to the stereotypes,
however, there have been notable attempts to change this. Work, such as
Humphrey’s (2003), should be factored into any future work to help combat the
negativity associated with the disability by working improving the individuals
with dyslexia’s self-esteem and training teachers have the correct knowledge
about dyslexia and how to include them into education effectively. Although it is
time consuming, the issue is only worsening in society. Discrimination and
bullying should not be tolerated in any setting, however, Humphrey (2003)
states that these are not deemed to be enough of an issue to invest time and
resources on. Society will not be able to move forward until changes are made
to address these issues instead of ignoring them, which, in turn, makes
individuals feel like they should hide their disability and feel ashamed.
A significant finding of this study, therefore, is the need for more
awareness of the learning disability dyslexia as incorrect stereotypes are still
flourishing in society’s beliefs. Given these findings, there should be awareness
lessons integrated into the national curriculum so that the younger generation is
presented with the facts at an early stage which should encourage them to
reject the stereotypes as they will know the facts about the disability. In the long

28
term, these facts will be able to be passed down from generation to generation
leading to a socialising of the facts and positive attitudes about the disability.
Having awareness in the national curriculum would enable an open
conservation to be had and enable individuals to ask questions which would be
answered with facts thus leaving less room for stereotypes to influence their
beliefs.
Through the literature search, it was apparent that students are not the
only social group to hold these beliefs. Even teachers and education
professionals hold these views. The evidence gathered suggests that
measuring the implicit beliefs held by applicants could be useful when they
apply for teaching positions. This would reduce the amount of teachers with
these views. It would also be beneficial for this to be adapted to other
disabilities, not just learning disabilities such as dyslexia. If there is a negative
result then additional training and awareness courses should be put into place
to make sure that teachers know the facts so that their views could change and
they will not negatively affect the children they teach. As education is such an
important stage in a child’s life, it is key that the education system does not fail
these children or young people.
This study was carefully researched, crafted and implemented to be able
to gather the most reliable and holistic data possible. The study aimed to gather
the true beliefs of the participants, which is why implicit and explicit measures
were conducted. The study did not find positive results of society moving
forward in knowing the facts about dyslexia nor of reducing the amount of
negative stereotypes around the disability. The study highlighted that, on the
face of the issue, explicitly, the stereotypes are decreasing, however, deeper
investigation into participants’ core, implicit beliefs did not yield the same
results. Participants still hold very damaging negative stereotypes which could
underpin their decision making when they are in contact with someone with
dyslexia. Further research would benefit from using implicit and explicit
measurements to gain a more holistic picture. Moreover, it would be interesting

29
for further research to investigate into what stage these stereotypes become
part of an individual’s core beliefs and if these can change after training and
education about the facts of dyslexia.

30
References
American Heart Association. (2003). Stroke risk factors. Accessed Dec. 11,
2003. http://www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=237
American Psychological Association,. (2015). Ethical Principles of Psychologists
and Code of Conduct. Retrieved 19 February 2015, from
http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/index.aspx
Bell, S., McPhillips, T. & Doveston, M. (2011). How do teachers in Ireland and
England conceptualise dyslexia? Journal of Research in Reading,
34,171-192.
Bennett, J. E. (2013). Social class identity: The role of identity changeability
perceptions on the relationship between beliefs about intelligence and
stereotype-relevant outcomes [electronic resource]
Betz, D. E. (2013). Feminine stem role models: Attempts to improve women's
motivation in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics fields
by countering the unfeminine-stem stereotype [electronic resource]
Bogdanowicz,M. (1996). Awareness of dyslexia in Poland, Keynote speech,
Dyslexia in Higher Education, 2nd International Conference, Dartington
Hall, Devon, UK.
British Dyslexia Association,. (2015). Dyslexia and Specific Difficulties:
Overview | British Dyslexia Association. Retrieved 16 February 2015,
from http://www.bdadyslexia.org.uk/dyslexic/dyslexia-and-specific-
difficulties-overview
Carlsson, R., & Björklund, F. (2010). Implicit Stereotype Content. Social
Psychology, 41(4), 213-222. doi:10.1027/1864-9335/a000029
Carugati, F. (1990). Everyday ideas, theoretical models & social
representations: the case of intelligence and its development, in Semin,
G. & K. Gergen, K. (Eds) Everyday Understanding: social & scienti®c
implications London, Sage.

31
Crocker, J., Major, B., Steele, C. (1998). Social stigma. In Handbook of Social
Psychology, ed. S Fiske, D Gilbert, G Lindzey, 2, 504–53.
Cvencek, D., Meltzoff, A., & Greenwald, A. (2011). Math-Gender Stereotypes in
Elementary School Children. Child Development, 82(3), 766-779.
doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01529.x
Davis, C. (2014). STEM stereotypes. Diverse Issues in Higher Education,
31(19), 5.
Dyslexia Action,. (2015). About dyslexia | Dyslexia Action. Retrieved 16
February 2015, from http://www.dyslexiaaction.org.uk/about-dyslexia
Dyson, L. (2003). Children with Learning Disabilities Within the Family Context:
A Comparison with Siblings in Global Self-Concept, Academic Self-
Perception, and Social Competence. Learning Disabil Res Pract, 18(1),
1-9. doi:10.1111/1540-5826.00053
Elliott, J. & Place, M. (2004). Difﬁculties in children. London, Routledge.
Elliott, J. (2005). Dyslexia: diagnoses, debates and diatribes. Spec Child, 169,
19–23.
Evans, W. (2013). ‘I am not a dyslexic person I'm a person with dyslexia’:
identity constructions of dyslexia among students in nurse education. J
Adv Nurs, 70(2), 360-372. doi:10.1111/jan.12199
Fernández, J., Quiroga, M. Á., Escorial, S., & Privado, J. (2014). Explicit and
implicit assessment of gender roles. Psicothema, 26(2), 244-251.
Gallagher, J.J. (1976). The sacred and profane uses of labels, Exceptional
Children, 45, 3–7.
Gillies, V. (2005). Raising the ‘meritocracy’: parenting and individualization of
social class. Sociology, 39, 835-854.

32
Hilton, J., L. (1996). Stereotypes. Annual Review of Psychology, 47, 237-271.
Retrieved from
http://web.ebscohost.com.atlas.worc.ac.uk/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?si
d=c480c393-1991-426b-9d78-
f17b02988c9b%40sessionmgr4002&vid=2&hid=4209
Hornstra, L., Denessen, E., Bakker, J., van den Bergh, L., & Voeten, M. (2010).
Teacher Attitudes Toward Dyslexia: Effects on Teacher Expectations and
the Academic Achievement of Students With Dyslexia. Journal Of
Learning Disabilities, 43(6), 515-529. doi:10.1177/0022219409355479
Humphrey, N. (2003). Facilitating a positive sense of self in pupils with dyslexia:
the role of teachers and peers. Support For Learning, 18(3), 130-136.
doi:10.1111/1467-9604.00295
Johnstone, D. (1998). An Introduction to Disability Studies (London, David
Fulton Publishers).
Macdonald, S., J. (2010). Towards a social reality of dyslexia. British Journal of
Learning Disabilities, 38(4), 271-327. Retrieved from
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com.atlas.worc.ac.uk/doi/10.1111/j.1468-
3156.2009.00601.x/pdf
Macrae, C. N., Bodenhausen, G. V., & Milne, A. B. (1995). The dissection of
selection in person perception: Inhibitory processes in social
stereotyping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 397–407.
Major, B., & O'Brien, L. (2005). The Social Psychology of Stigma. Annu. Rev.
Psychol., 56(1), 393-421. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070137
May, A., & Stone, C. (2010). Stereotypes of Individuals With Learning
Disabilities: Views of College Students With and Without Learning
Disabilities. Journal Of Learning Disabilities, 43(6), 483-499.
doi:10.1177/0022219409355483
McKown, C., Weinstein, R. S. (2003).. The development and consequences of
stereotype consciousness in middle childhood. Child Dev. 74:498–515

33
Monteith, L., & Pettit, J. (2011). Implicit and Explicit Stigmatizing Attitudes and
Stereotypes About Depression. Journal Of Social And Clinical
Psychology, 30(5), 484-505. doi:10.1521/jscp.2011.30.5.484
Moore, J. (2006). Shattering Stereotypes: A Lesson Plan for Improving Student
Attitudes and Behavior toward Minority Groups. The Social Studies,
97(1), 35-39. doi:10.3200/tsss.97.1.35-39
Nickerson, R. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many
guises. Review of General Psychology, 2(2), 175-220.
Paradice, R. (2001). An Investigation into the Social Construction of Dyslexia.
Educational Psychology in Practice, 17(3), 213-225.
Prevett, P., Bell, S., & Ralph, S. (2013). Dyslexia and education in the 21st
century. Journal Of Research In Special Educational Needs, 13(1), 1-6.
doi:10.1111/1471-3802.12004
Regan, T. & Woods, K. (2000). Teachers' Understandings of Dyslexia:
Implications for educational psychology practice. Educational Psychology
in Practice, 16(3), 333-347.
Rekdal, O. (2014). Monuments to Academic Carelessness: The Self-fulfilling
Prophecy of Katherine Frost Bruner. Science, Technology & Human
Values, 39(5), 744-758. doi:10.1177/0162243914532138
Riddick, B. (1995). Dyslexia: dispelling the myths. Disability & Society, 10(4),
457-474. Retrieved from
http://www.tandfonline.com.atlas.worc.ac.uk/doi/pdf/10.1080/096875995
50023453.
Riddick, B. (2000). An Examination of the Relationship Between Labelling and
Stigmatisation with Special Reference to Dyslexia. Disability & Society,
15(4), 653-667.
Rohmer, O., & Louvet, E. (2012). Implicit measures of the stereotype content
associated with disability. British Journal Of Social Psychology, 51(4),
732-740. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.2011.02087.x

34
Rudman, L., Phelan, J., & Heppen, J. (2007). Developmental Sources of Implicit
Attitudes. Personality And Social Psychology Bulletin, 33(12), 1700-
1713. doi:10.1177/0146167207307487
Steinhart, Y. (2012). When implicit promises override explicit promises.
European Journal Of Marketing, 46(11/12), 1708-1725.
doi:10.1108/03090561211260059
Stier, A., & Hinshaw, S. (2007). Explicit and implicit stigma against individuals
with mental illness. Aus. Psychologist, 42(2), 106-117.
doi:10.1080/00050060701280599
Tanner, K. (2009). Adult dyslexia and the ‘conundrum of failure’. Disability &
Society, 24(6), 785-797.
Thomas, C. (2003). Defining a theoretical agenda for disability studies: Theory,
policy and practice. Paper presented at the Inaugural Conference of the
Disability Studies Association, September 4–6, in Lancaster University.
http://www.disabilitystudies.net/dsaconf2003/fullpapers/thomas.doc
Tomlinson, S. (1993). Contradicts and dilemmas for professionals in special
education, in: L.APELT (Ed.) Social Justice, Equity and Dilemmas of
Disability in Education (Brisbane, Queensland Department of Education).
Tunmer, W., & Greaney, K. (2009). Defining Dyslexia. Journal Of Learning
Disabilities, 43(3), 229-243. doi:10.1177/0022219409345009
Woods, K. (1998). Dyslexia: questions from a social psychology perspective.
Educational Psychology in Practice, 13(4), 274–278.
Yinger, J. (1994). Ethnicity: Source of Strength? Source of Conflict? Albany,
NY: State Univ. NY Press

35
Appendix
Appendix One.
Data Authenticity Check Form
PSYC3001/3002 Independent Studies 2014-2015
Student Name: Hayley Gibson
Student ID: 12006955
TO BE COMPLETED BY SUPERVISOR:
I have received sufficient content of this student’s raw data collected as part of their
Independent study YES
I am happy that the data collected is authentic YES
Supervisor Name: Daniel Farrelly
Supervisor Signature:
Date: 21/4/2015

36
Appendix Two.
Part One.
Participant Number:
Instructions
Please read and answer the following questions. Take your time and
thank you for participating in my study. You can indicate your answer by
circling or highlighting it.
For thefollowing questions, answer if you:
StronglyAgree, Agree, NeitherAgreeor Disagree,Disagree or Strongly
Disagree.
1) What is your gender?
a. Male
b. Female
c. Other
2) What is your age?

37
e. Strongly Disagree
3) I find it difficult to work with someone with dyslexia.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neither Agree or Disagree
d. Disagree
4) I don’t think that individuals with dyslexia get enough support.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
5) Individuals with dyslexia are not highly intelligent.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
6) Individuals with dyslexia are good communicators.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree

38
7) Individuals with dyslexia could make good leaders.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
8) Individuals with dyslexia would not be good teachers.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
9) Dyslexia is just a term for individuals who cannot read.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
10) Individuals with dyslexia tend to give up easily.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree

39
You have now completed the first section of the study, please refer to
the researcher for the second half instructions. Thank you.
11) Individuals with dyslexia show more negative behavior in education or the
workplace.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
12) I have come into contact with individuals with dyslexia.
a. Yes
b. No
c. Unsure
13) I know the facts about dyslexia.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
14) Have you been diagnosed with the disability Dyslexia?
a. Yes
b. No

40
Appendix Three

41

42
Appendix Four
ParticipantNumber ________
Answer Sheet.
Practice
1. Left Right
2. Left Right
3. Left Right
Condition One
1. Left Right
2. Left Right
3. Left Right
4. Left Right
5. Left Right

43
Condition Two
1. Left Right
2. Left Right
3. Left Right
4. Left Right
5. Left Right
Condition Three
1. Left Right
2. Left Right
3. Left Right
4. Left Right
5. Left Right

44
Condition Four
1. Left Right
2. Left Right
3. Left Right
4. Left Right
5. Left Right

45
Appendix Five
Participant Information Sheet
Title of Project: How do university students perceive
words and images in a timed task?
Invitation
We would like to invite you to take part in a research project. Before you
decide whether to take part it is important that you understand why the
research is being done and what it will involve. Please take time to read
this carefully and ask the researcher if you have any questions.
What is the purpose of the study?
The purpose of the study is to see if university student’s times taken to
undertake a task differ when presented with different stimuli?
Why have I been invited to take part?
You have received this invitation because you are an undergraduate at the
university and could be interested in taking part in a new study.
Do I have to take part?
No. It is up to you to decide whether or not you want to take part in this
study. Please take your time to decide. You can decide not to take part or
to withdraw from the study up to 28 days after your participation in the
study. If you wish to have your data withdrawn please contact the
researcher with your participant number and your data will then not be
used. If you do decide to take part you will be asked to sign a consent
form.
What will happen to me if I agree to take part?
1. You will be given a consent form so you are agreeing to take part in this
psychological study.
2. You will then be given a questionnaire to complete.
3. The next stage will involve completing a test on the computer.

46
4. You will then be given a debrief form and will have the opportunity to ask
any questions you will have.
 It is expected to take no longer than 20 minutes of your time.
Are there any disadvantages risks to taking part?
If you feel distressed at any point during or after the study there are many
options available for you to help.
 If you do find this to be the case, please do not hesitate to contact
me and I shall direct you to an appropriate cancelling service.
 Or you could speak to the friendly members of staff on the First
Point desk who can make you an appointment to speak to a
qualified member of staff.
 You can contact them at firstpoint@worc.ac.uk or telephone 01905
542551. They are open Monday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday
from 9am to 5pm and on Tuesday from 10am to 5pm.
 Also you can also withdraw at any time during the study and 28
days after participation.
Will the information I give stay confidential?
The information you give may be used for a research report, but it will not
be possible to identify you from our research report or any other
dissemination activities. Personal identifiable information (e.g. name and
contact details) will be securely stored and kept for up to 4 months after
the project ends on the 7th of May and then securely disposed of. The
research data (e.g. questionnaires) will be securely stored and may be
used for further research purposes.
What will happen to the results of the research study?
This research is being carried out as part of my Bsc Honours Major
Psychology with Minor Sociology degree at the University of Worcester.
The findings of this study will be reported as part of my dissertation and
may also be published in academic journals or at conferences.
If you wish to receive a summary of the research findings please contact
the researcher.
Who is organising the research?
This research has been approved by the University of Worcester, Institute of Health
Ethics Committee.
What happens next?
Please keep this information sheet and if you do decide to take part, you will now
receive a consent form to complete.

47
Thank you for taking the time to read this information
If you decide to take part of you have any questions, concerns or complaints about this
study please contact one of the research team using the details below.
If you would like to speak to an independent person who is not a member of
the research team, please contact John-Paul Wilson at the University of
Worcester, using the following details:
John-Paul Wilson
Research Manager
Graduate Research School
University of Worcester
Henwick Grove
Worcester WR2 6AJ
01905 542196
j.wilson@worc.ac.uk
Supervisor:
Daniel Farrelly
d.farrelly@worc.ac.uk
Student researcher:
Hayley Gibson
Gibh1_12@uni.worc.ac.uk

48
Appendix Six
Participant Consent Form
Title of project: How do university studentsperceive words andimages ina
timedtask?
ParticipantIdentificationNumber: ______
Name of Researcher: Hayley Gibson
YES NO
1
.
I confirm that I have read and understood the information
sheet for the above study and have had the opportunity to
ask questions.
2
.
I confirm that I have had sufficient time to consider whether
I wantto take part inthisstudy
3
.
I understandthatI do nothave to take part inthisresearch
and I can change my mindat any time.IunderstandthatI
may withdrawmydate bycontactingthe researcherwith
my participantnumberupto28 daysaftertakingpart
I agree to my researchdatabeingusedinpublicationsor
reports
5
.
I agree to take part in the study.
I know who to contact if I have any concerns about this
research
Name of participant _________________________________________

49
Date__________________ Signature __________________________
Name of persontakingconsent ________________________________
Date__________________ Signature ___________________________

50
Appendix Seven
Debrief Form.
Thank you for taking part in my study. The aim of the
study is to see if student’s implicit and explicit
perceptionsof dyslexia correspond.
If you feel distressed at any point during or after the study there are many
options available for you to help.
 If you do find this to be the case, please do not hesitate to contact
me on gibh1_12@uni.worc.ac.uk and I shall direct you to an
appropriate cancelling service.
 Or you could speak to the friendly members of staff on the First
Point desk who can make you an appointment to speak to a
qualified member of staff.
 You can contact them at firstpoint@worc.ac.uk or telephone 01905
542551. They are open Monday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday
from 9am to 5pm and on Tuesday from 10am to 5pm.
 Also you can also withdraw at any time during the study and 28
days after participation.

51
Appendix Eight

52

53

54

55

56

57
Appendix Nine

58

59
Appendix Ten
Figure 1
Figure 2
Appendix Eleven

60
Appendix Twelve

PSYC3002 Independent Study - 12006955

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (7)

Similar to PSYC3002 Independent Study - 12006955

Similar to PSYC3002 Independent Study - 12006955 (20)

PSYC3002 Independent Study - 12006955