Alex Ward Elon University Mentor: Dr. Maurice J. Levesque

 The ability to consciously control impulses and resist temptations Ex: Resisting the impulse/temptation to check social media while completing a long research paper  Allows individuals to flexibly respond or adapt to situational demands  When individuals engage in self-regulation on a task, their ability to self-regulate is then diminished for a period of time (DeWall, Baumeister, Stillman, & Gailliot, 2007)

 State when an individual is not able to exhibit optimal self- regulation due to the energy and focus that has been used to self- regulate on a previous task (Hagger, Wood, Stiff, & Chatzisarantis, 2010)  Ego depletion effects (Dorris, Power, and Kenefick, 2012): - Physical and cognitive performance - Emotional experiences and expression - Behavior  Varies in severity depending on the intensity or number of tasks completed  Recently, efforts have begun to better understand how to reduce the effect of ego depletion or enhance recovery from ego depletion

Plant Life: Calmer, more relaxed. - Frumkin (2001) Natural Landscapes: Positive impact on mood and stress-related symptoms

Exercise in nature: Higher levels of self-esteem, mood, and energy (Barton, Griffin, and Pretty, 2012).  Natural environments as a possible restorative  Can natural environments attenuate levels of ego depletion or increase the rate of recovery from ego depletion?

 132 participants (121 female, 11 male)  3x3 Design  3 Depletion Conditions  3 Environmental Conditions  Focus on the results of the Ego Depletion Task performance and change over time on a physical performance task

 Minimal - Please cross out every “e” that you see on the provided pages.  Mild - Please cross out every “e” that does not have a vowel in the two spaces before the “e”. For instance, you would cross out the “e” in “granted” but not in “grated”.  Moderate - Please cross out every “e” that does not have a vowel within two places to the right or left of the “e”. For instance, you would cross off the “e” in “commentator”, but neither of the “e”s in “debater”.

Although it is perhaps easiest to think of the covariate as involving the same instrument or as being the same conceptual measure as the dependent variable, it is not necessary to do so. One could predict a child’s private speech after instructions by his or her private speech before instructions, but one might also use a quite different variable such as chronological age or mental age as the covariate. Variables that are on the same scale or expressed in the same units, for example, verbal IQ and performance IQ, are said to be commensurate. If one is to compute differences between measures, as is done in a matched-pairs t test, it is necessary that the variables be commensurate. However, for most of the analyses considered in this chapter, the covariate and dependent variables are not required to be commensurate. A second preliminary point concerns the need to distinguish between using the concomitant variable or covariate in the design of the study as opposed to the analysis. It is possible to use a concomitant variable in the design of the study but not in the analysis, in the analysis but not in the design, or in both the analysis and the design, although not all these options are necessarily desirable. The concomitant variable is used in the design of the study if it is used in the assignment of subjects to groups. The concomitant variable is used in the analysis if it is represented in the models used in analyzing the data. In part, then, the goal may be to equate the groups either experimentally or statistically. To accomplish this “experimental,” one can form the treatment groups in such a way that they are “matched” on the concomitant variable, as long as the concomitant, variable scores are available prior to the formation of the treatment groups. The sense in which the groups are matched and the specifics of how the matching can be carried out are described later in the section n blocking. Statistical equating of groups is accomplished by allowing for variation in the covariate both within and between groups in analyzing data. Both experimental and statistical means of controlling for ancillary variables yield advantages. A related point to the distinction between using the concomitant variable in design as opposed to analysis is the issue of whether the concomitant variable is to be treated as a continuous variable. When the concomitant variable is a continuous variable used to form the groups for the design, it is common practice to ignore at least some of the continuous information in the concomitant variable when the time comes to analyze the data. As we argue on subsequently in the chapter, to do so is to throw away information. Alternatively, the concomitant variable can be viewed as a continuous variable throughout. In this situation, the concomitant variable is viewed as varying along with the dependent variable. This is why, as mentioned previously, the concomitant variable in this context is called a covariate, and the analysis method that takes into account the relationship between groups in analyzing data. Both experimental and statistical means of controlling for ancillary variables yield advantages. A related point to the distinction between using the concomitant variable in design as opposed to analysis is the issue of whether the concomitant variable is to be treated as a continuous variable. When the concomitant variable is a continuous variable used to form the groups for the design, it is common practice to ignore at least some of the continuous information in the concomitant variable when the time comes to analyze the data. As we argue on subsequently in the chapter, to do so is to throw away information. Alternatively, the concomitant variable can be viewed as a continuous variable throughout. In this situation, the concomitant variable is viewed as varying along with the dependent variable. This is why, as mentioned previously, the concomitant variable in this context is called a covariate, and the analysis method that takes into account the relationship between the covariate and the dependent variable is referred to as analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). In most ANCOVA studies, the covariate is not considered at the time of forming groups, although as we will see, there could be some advantages in doing so.

 Performance on Vowel Recognition Task –Number of “e”s crossed out per condition indicates the variation in difficulty  Handgrip Task – Level of depletion shown through change in time of persistence on the Handgrip Task  Mood Scales – Show change over time in overall mood and positive or negative affect  Surveys – Provide supplementary information concerning the tasks and measures

Informed ConsentMood ScaleHandgrip Pre-Test Vowel Recognition Task (Nature Post- Depletion) Vowel Recognition Task (Control) Vowel Recognition Task (Nature Depletion) Mood Scale/VRT Survey (Nature Depletion) Mood Scale/VRT Survey (Control) Mood Scale/VRT Survey (Nature Post- Depletion) Handgrip Post- Test/Survey/Debrief (Nature Post- Depletion) Handgrip Post- Test/Survey/Debrief (Control) Handgrip Post- Test/Survey/Debrief (Nature Depletion)

 Higher presence of general positive affect; low presence of general negative affect  High average level of effort on Handgrip Task  Concentration did not differ by depletion condition; perceived difficulty did  Statistically significant changes in Overall Mood, Handgrip Task Performance, and four of the five mood clusters

 3x3 Between Subjects Design  Vowel Recognition Task Performance by condition Environment Level of Ego Depletion ControlNature-DepletionNature-Post-DepletionTotal Minimal Depletion (96.82) (74.60) (97.23) (89.44) Mild depletion (32.07) (31.13)98.79 (29.24) (30.68) Moderate Depletion28.36 (7.20)29.24 (6.52)30.38 (8.86)29.38 (7.57) Total (136.92) (143.80) (132.31)

 3x3 Between Subjects Design  Vowel Recognition Task Performance by condition Environment Level of Ego Depletion ControlNature-DepletionNature-Post-DepletionTotal Minimal Depletion (96.82) (74.60) (97.23) (89.44) Mild depletion (32.07) (31.13)98.79 (29.24) (30.68) Moderate Depletion28.36 (7.20)29.24 (6.52)30.38 (8.86)29.38 (7.57) Total (136.92) (143.80) (132.31)

 3x3 Between Subjects Design  Handgrip Task Performance – Change over time Environment Level of Ego Depletion ControlNature-DepletionNature-Post-DepletionTotal Minimal Depletion26.99 (32.71)10.11 (14.25)23.51 (26.32)20.21 (26.07) Mild depletion17.68 (15.02)15.46 (15.20)14.50 (19.68)16.11 (16.32) Moderate depletion32.24 (38.40)15.30 (15.41)18.19 (20.81)22.05 (27.78) Total25.31 (29.84)13.50 (14.78)18.97 (22.24)

 Effect of Environmental Condition Environment Level of Ego Depletion ControlNature-DepletionNature-Post-DepletionTotal Minimal Depletion26.99 (32.71)10.11 (14.25)23.51 (26.32)20.21 (26.07) Mild depletion17.68 (15.02)15.46 (15.20)14.50 (19.68)16.11 (16.32) Moderate depletion32.24 (38.40)15.30 (15.41)18.19 (20.81)22.05 (27.78) Total25.31 (29.84)13.50 (14.78)18.97 (22.24)

 Effect of Depletion Condition Environment Level of Ego Depletion ControlNature-DepletionNature-Post-DepletionTotal Minimal Depletion26.99 (32.71)10.11 (14.25)23.51 (26.32)20.21 (26.07) Mild depletion17.68 (15.02)15.46 (15.20)14.50 (19.68)16.11 (16.32) Moderate depletion32.24 (38.40)15.30 (15.41)18.19 (20.81)22.05 (27.78) Total25.31 (29.84)13.50 (14.78)18.97 (22.24)

 Vowel Recognition Task – Statistical significance for performance by depletion condition  Nature Condition – No statistical significance, but hints in the right direction  Indication of the effect of natural environments on attenuation of ego depletion, but lack of statistical significance

 High variation in handgrip performance, even after looking individual’s average change in performance  Noticeable difference in difficulty of ego depletion task, but was it true depletion? No significant differences in concentration, although participants rated conditions to be more difficult  Exposure to nature was too limited? Whether in time or intensity