FINAL PROJECT

Attentional Capacity Begets

Extraversion: Evidence for a
New Underlying Mechanism

A Research Grant Proposal to the National Science Foundation by
Matthew Scott


COVER SHEET FOR PROPOSAL TO THE NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION



PROGRAM ANNOUNCEMENT/SOLICITATION NO./CLOSING DATE/If not in response to a program announcement/solicitation enter NSF 00-2
FOR NSF USE ONLY
PD 98-1332 / 15 July 2014
NSF PROPOSAL NUMBER

FOR CONSIDERATION BY NSF ORGANIZATIONAL UNIT(S) (Indicate the most specific unit known, i.e., program, division, etc.)


Division of Behavioral Sciences
DATE RECEIVED NUMBER OF COPIES DIVISION
ASSIGNED
FUND CODE DUNS # (Data Universal Numbering System)
8747693
390i4
FILE LOCATION

EMPLOYER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (EIN) OR SHOW PREVIOUS AWARD NO. IF THIS IS IS THIS PROPOSAL BEING SUBMITTED TO ANOTHER FEDERAL
TAXPAYER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (TIN)
A RENEWAL

AGENCY? YES NO x IF YES, LIST ACRONYM(S)
46-3957732 AN ACCOMPLISHMENT-BASED RENEWAL






NAME OF ORGANIZATION TO WHICH AWARD SHOULD BE MADE ADDRESS OF AWARDEE ORGANIZATION, INCLUDING 9 DIGIT ZIP CODE
North Dakota State University North Dakota State University

.
AWARDEE ORGANIZATION CODE (IF KNOWN)
P.O. Box 6050
Fargo, ND 58102-6050 Fargo, ND 58102-6050
NAME OF PERFORMING ORGANIZATION, IF DIFFERENT FROM
ABOVE
ADDRESS OF PERFORMING ORGANIZATION, IF DIFFERENT, INCLUDING 9 DIGIT ZIP CODE

PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE (IF KNOWN)


IS AWARDEE ORGANIZATION (Check All That Apply)
(See GPG II.D.1 For Definitions) FOR-PROFIT ORGANIZATION SMALL BUSINESS MINORITY BUSINESS WOMAN-OWNED BUSINESS



TITLE OF PROPOSED PROJECT
Attentional Capacity Begets Extraversion: Evidence For A New Underlying Mechanism


REQUESTED AMOUNT

$33010
PROPOSED DURATION (1-60 MONTHS)

12
months
REQUESTED STARTING DATE

01 Sept 2014
SHOW RELATED PREPROPOSAL NO.,
IF APPLICABLE


CHECK APPROPRIATE BOX(ES) IF THIS PROPOSAL INCLUDES ANY OF THE ITEMS LISTED BELOW

BEGINNING INVESTIGATOR (GPG I.A.3)

VERTEBRATE ANIMALS (GPG II.D.12) IACUC App. Date

DISCLOSURE OF LOBBYING ACTIVITIES (GPG II.D.1)

X HUMAN SUBJECTS (GPG II.D.12)
PROPRIETARY & PRIVILEGED INFORMATION (GPG I.B, II.D.7)
Exemption Subsection or IRB App. Date
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (GPG II.D.10) INTERNATIONAL COOPERATIVE ACTIVITIES: COUNTRY/COUNTRIES
HISTORIC PLACES (GPG II.D.10)


SMALL GRANT FOR EXPLOR. RESEARCH (SGER) (GPG II.D.12)

FACILITATION FOR SCIENTISTS/ENGINEERS WITH DISABILITIES (GPG V.G.)


RESEARCH OPPORTUNITY AWARD (GPG V.H)


PI/PD DEPARTMENT PI/PD POSTAL ADDRESS

Psychology 673 Elm Circle
PI/PD FAX NUMBER
Fargo, ND 58102

701-522-9045

NAMES (TYPED) High Degree Yr of Degree Telephone Number Electronic Mail Address

PI/PD NAME Matthew Scott Ph.D 2002 701-344-8087 matthew.j.scott@my.ndsu.edu




CO-PI/PD Cheryl Barnes Ph.D 2010 218-344-9274 cheryl.barnes@my.ndsu.edu




CO-PI/PD




CO-PI/PD




CO-PI/PD



NSF Form 1207 (10/99) Page 1 of 2





CERTIFICATION PAGE

Certification for Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators
I certify to the best of my knowledge that:

(1) the statements herein (excluding scientific hypotheses and scientific opinions) are true and complete, and
(2) the text and graphics herein as well as any accompanying publications or other documents, unless otherwise indicated, are the original work of the
signatories or individuals working under their supervision. I agree to accept responsibility for the scientific conduct of the project and to provide the
required project reports if an award is made as a result of this proposal.

I understand that the willful provision of false information or concealing a material fact in this proposal or any other communication submitted to NSF is a
criminal offense (U.S.Code, Title 18, Section 1001).


Name (Typed) Signature Social Security No.* Date
PI/PD
Matthew Scott
Matthew J Scott
123-45-6789 30 April 2014
Co-PI/PD
Cheryl Barnes
Cheryl Barnes
987-65-4321 30 April 2014
Co-PI/PD

Co-PI/PD

Co-PI/PD


Certification for Authorized Organizational Representative or Individual Applicant
By signing and submitting this proposal, the individual applicant or the authorized official of the applicant institution is: (1) certifying that statements made herein
are true and complete to the best of his/her knowledge; and (2) agreeing to accept the obligation to comply with NSF award terms and conditions if an award is
made as a result of this application. Further, the applicant is hereby providing certifications regarding Federal debt status, debarment and suspension, drug-free
workplace, and lobbying activities (see below), as set forth in the Grant Proposal Guide (GPG), NSF 00-2. Willful provision of false information in this application
and its supporting documents or in reports required under an ensuing award is a criminal offense (U.S. Code, Title 18, Section 1001).

In addition, if the applicant institution employs more than fifty persons, the authorized official of the applicant institution is certifying that the institution has
implemented a written and enforced conflict of interest policy that is consistent with the provisions of Grant Policy Manual Section 510; that to the best of his/her
knowledge, all financial disclosures required by that conflict of interest policy have been made; and that all identified conflicts of interest will have been
satisfactorily managed, reduced or eliminated prior to the institutions expenditure of any funds under the award, in accordance with the institutions conflict of
interest policy. Conflicts that cannot be satisfactorily managed, reduced or eliminated must be disclosed to NSF.

Debt and Debarment Certifications (If answer yes to either, please provide explanation.)
Is the organization delinquent on any Federal debt?
Yes
No x

Is the organization or its principals presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible,


or voluntarily excluded from covered transactions by any Federal Department or agency?
Yes No x

Certification Regarding Lobbying

This certification is required for an award of a Federal contract, grant or cooperative agreement exceeding $100,000 and for an award of a Federal loan or
a commitment providing for the United States to insure or guarantee a loan exceeding $150,000.

Certification for Contracts, Grants, Loans and Cooperative Agreements

The undersigned certifies, to the best of his or her knowledge and belief, that:

(1) No Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of the undersigned, to any person for influencing or attempting to
influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in
connection with the awarding of any federal contract, the making of any Federal grant, the making of any Federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative
agreement, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement.

(2) If any funds other than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or
employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, and officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this
Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement, the undersigned shall complete and submit Standard Form LLL, Disclosure of Lobbying
Activities, in accordance with its instructions.

(3) The undersigned shall require that the language of this certification be included in the award documents for all subawards at all tiers including

subcontracts, subgrants, and contracts under grants, loans, and cooperative agreements and that all subrecipients shall certify and disclose accordingly.

This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transaction was made or entered into. Submission of this
certification is a prerequisite for making or entering into this transaction imposed by Section 1352, Title 31, U.S. Code. Any person who fails to file the

required certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure.


AUTHORIZED ORGANIZATIONAL REPRESENTATIVE SIGNATURE DATE
NAME/TITLE (TYPED)

TELEPHONE NUMBER ELECTRONIC MAIL ADDRESS FAX NUMBER






*SUBMISSION OF SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS IS VOLUNTARY AND WILL NOT AFFECT THE ORGANIZATIONS ELIGIBILITY FOR AN AWARD. HOWEVER, THEY ARE AN
INTEGRAL PART OF THE NSF INFORMATION SYSTEM AND ASSIST IN PROCESSING THE PROPOSAL. SSN SOLICITED UNDER NSF ACT OF 1950, AS AMENDED.

Page 2 of 2
1

PROJECT SUMMARY
TITLE: Attentional Capacity Begets Extraversion: An Exploration of A New Underlying Mechanism

The purpose of this project is to study the difference in attentional capacity between introverted people and ex-
traverts. Participants will be given the Eysenck Personality Inventory to place them on a scale of extraversion.
They will then be run through a series of tests to quantify their visual and auditory attentional capacities. Extra-
version is presently thought to be a function of resting arousal levels. Specifically, more arousal is linked to nar-
rowing of the band of attention. One week after the first test session, participants will be subjected to the same
measures. Half of them will have been administered 200 milligrams of anhydrous caffeine two hours before the
test session. Manipulating this arousal level with caffeine should result in a larger narrowing of attention in the
introverted group than in the extraverted group, based on current accepted theories. However, pilot data has not
shown this to be the case. In fact, introverts have shown an increase in attentional capacity as a result of caffeine
intake. This is directly in contrast to the current theory on the roots of trait extraversion. These results, if repli-
cated in a full study, would point to a new direction in extraversion research, indicating the possibility that at-
tentional capacity and not arousal levels are at the root of extraversion.
















2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Project Description 3
Biographical Sketches 7
Budget and Budget Justification 8
Current and Pending Support 8
Facilities, Equipment and Other Resources 8
Special Information and Supplementary Documentation 8
References Cited 9




















3


PROJECT DESCRIPTION
TITLE: Attentional Capacity Begets Extraversion: An Exploration of A New Underlying Mechanism

Introduction
A common perception of introverted people is that they are overwhelmed in social situations. They seem to
function at a higher level when their environment is quiet. Current models propose that extraversion is a func-
tion of arousal, specifically that extraverts have lower baseline arousal than introverts. This theory does not al-
ways hold up. Arousal levels have been found to be non-predictive of task performance and extraversion. Fur-
ther study into the nature of extraversion, specifically of underlying mechanisms that may interact with or act
independently of arousal, would be useful in understanding the nature of this personality trait. This study aims
to investigate intrinsic attentional capacity as a correlate of extraversion.

Attention has been linked to arousal levels for decades. Easterbrooke (1959) famously found that increasing
levels of arousal narrow the attentional field. Largely due to subsequent work by Hans Eysenck (1967), the per-
sonality trait extraversion is generally accepted as being a function of baseline arousal levels. Eysenck proposed
that extraverts have lower baseline arousal levels than introverts. Under equal levels of stimulation, the extra-
vert is thought to be aroused less than the introvert. This theory is used to explain the introverts better perfor-
mance during unarousing tasks that would put the extravert to sleep. It is also used to explain the opposite ef-
fect: the introverts performance on a task is lowered by stimulation levels that make the extravert improve. Dif-
fering arousal levels are thought to be the core factor in the performance variability.

Geen (1984) found that introverts chose less external stimulation than extraverts to accompany them on a task
on which they wanted optimal learning performance. After being grouped into high and low scorers on Ey-
sencks scale for extraversion, participants were given a learning task which was coupled with random spurts of
noise played through headphones at different levels. Asked to choose their optimal noise level for maximum
learning, extraverts chose an average noise level of 72 decibels while introverts chose 55 decibels. In their self-
chosen conditions, the groups displayed similar physiological arousal and task performance. A second condition
in which participants performed under a noise level chosen by a corresponding participant in the other extraver-
sion group had different results. Both groups performance suffered as a result of non-optimal arousal, with the
introverts subjected to noise showing the most degradation. This clearly demonstrated the effects of arousal on
performance as a function of trait extraversion.

That difference has been shown to disappear when the external stimulus is music, however. Cassidy and
McDonald (2007) compared introverts and extraverts in terms of their performance on immediate recall, free
recall, delayed recall, and a Stroop task. Accompanying their performances was either high arousal music of the
metal genre, low arousal music of the soft alternative genre, common background noise, or silence. All of the
noise conditions were presented at 60 decibels. Task performance did differ by condition, with performance im-
proving over the previous condition in the following order: high arousal music, noise, low arousal music, si-
lence. Among introverts and extraverts, however, there was no significant difference in individual changes in
performance across conditions. Overall, introverts were found to perform better in all conditions, but both
groups shifted performance at about the same rate.

4

Other studies have shown a significant difference in the amount that music distracts introverts and extraverts.
Using UK garage music that was highly popular, general background noise, and silence as conditions, Dobbs,
Furnham, and McClelland (2011) subjected introverts and extraverts categorized using Eysencks Personality
Inventory (1968) to tests of abstract reasoning, cognitive ability, and verbal reasoning. General noise and, to a
larger degree, music, negatively impacted all performances. The introverts showed a significantly larger per-
formance deficit caused by background noise and music.

The differences in reticocortical arousal as measured at the brain between the two groups was studied by
Beauducel, Brocke, and Leue (2006). Participants were classified as extraverted or introverted using Eysencks
Personality Questionnaire and then subjected to a monotonous vigilance task requiring them to respond to target
tones over a sixty minute period while an electroencephalograph (EEG) measured brain activity. They found no
difference in arousal levels between the two groups. Though the extraverts did exhibit lower performance on
this monotonous task and did exert greater effort as measured by EEG, their reticocortical arousal levels did not
differ significantly from those of the introverts.

Imaging studies done by Kumari et al. (2004) looked at the brain directly. Participants grouped by extraversion
using Eysencks EPQ-R were given a list to repeat in reverse order and observed with Functional Magnetic
Resonance Imaging (fMRI). Extraverts showed more overall increase in cortical activity than introverts as a
function of list length. This seems to chip away at a theory that defines introversion as a higher resting level of
cortical arousal. The study by Kumari et al. (2004) indicates more reactivity among the extraverts, which would
result in extravert vs. introvert performance equalizing at higher levels of stimulation, in stark opposition to ac-
cepted theories of arousal increasing at a linear rate from an extraversion-mediated baseline.

Fuller (1978) measured arousal levels from the other side, investigating backward starting with paired-associate
learning. After distinguishing participants as high or low in extraversion using Eysencks Personality Question-
naire, a paired-association learning task was given. The hypothesis was that extraverts, being of low arousal,
will have good immediate recall and poor 24-hour recall. Introverts would be highly aroused and have poor
immediate recall and good 24-hour recall. This hypothesis was based on earlier work that showed people best
report low-stimulus information in the short term while high-stimulus information takes longer to be absorbed
and would best be reported after significant time has passed. Fuller found no difference between extraverts and
introverts, indicating no real difference in arousal. Interestingly, this experiment was done on American college
students. Fuller stated that experiments using British college students always supported Eysencks theory of
arousal, while his American subjects never did. This induces doubt in the role of arousal as a mediator of differ-
ing task performance between extraverts and introverts.

The evidence so far suggests that extraverts prefer more arousal than introverts and actually do perform better in
its presence than do introverts. But is the baseline arousal level and the associated preferences for arousal the
cause of the performance difference between the two groups or is it a symptom of something deeper? One pos-
sible underlying factor may be the baseline attentional capacity of each group. The literature is lacking in this
area. Attentional capacity and extraversion are both presumed to be functions of arousal level, yet the literature
is not unanimous in connecting extraversion and arousal. Finding a difference in attentional system capacity be-
tween the two groups would clarify the difference in performance and fill in some of the gaps in current theo-
ries. We hypothesize that the introverts will have a smaller attentional capacity.

5

A difference in attentional capacity, according to Easterbrooke (1959), could be due to a difference in baseline
arousal levels. Manipulating arousal levels allows the study of the effect of arousal on cognitive tasks. Caffeine
has been used as a way of increasing arousal with significant results. Revelle et al. (1988) found that extraverts
steadily improve on cognitive tasks with increasing levels of administered caffeine, while the introverts had a
ceiling effect and, depending on time of day, lower performance with caffeine. Arousal levels changed perfor-
mance on tasks similar to the verbal component of the Graduate Record Exam (GRE). Vigilance tasks, the per-
formance of which is highly dependent on arousal, have also been shown to be performed differently under var-
ying levels of caffeine (Amir et al., 2001). Caffeine was administered to self-reported introverts and extraverts
and found to improve vigilance task performance for both groups significantly. Interestingly, both personality
groups improved at the same rate. There was no significant interaction between personality type and caffeine.
This result does not support an arousal-based theory of extraversion as introvert performance would have im-
proved less than extravert performance or even worsened after caffeine ingestion.

The literature does not unanimously support an arousal-based theory of extraversion. Perhaps there are more
factors at work in the task performance and optimal arousal levels of these two categories of people not based
on baseline arousal level. As mentioned earlier, attentional capacity may be correlated with extraversion. This
attentional capacity may be an underlying condition that informs the level of extraversion. An introvert may be
introverted because of a narrow attentional band that is overloaded easier than that of the extravert. Regardless
of underlying mechanisms, we hypothesize that introverts will have a smaller field of attentional capacity than
extraverts. Of course, the prevailing model of arousal-based extraversion could explain that variation by means
of baseline arousal levels, with the higher arousal of the introvert focusing the attentional spotlight on a smaller
area. To investigate whether this is the case, arousal levels would be manipulated and attentional capacity
measured again under the new arousal levels. Based on the literature, we hypothesize that an increase in arousal
will change attentional capacity, though the direction of the change and its interaction with personality type re-
mains unclear. Pilot data has shown that the classic theory of arousal narrowing attention for all is not entirely
sufficient.


Methods
One hundred undergraduate participants and 100 non-student adult participants, split evenly across genders,
would be selected from a group that had taken an abbreviated form of Eysencks Personality Inventory. Stu-
dents scoring very high or very low on the trait of extraversion would be selected with an ideal count of 100
participants from each category selected evenly from students and non-students.

Visual attentional capacity would be measured using a Functional Field of View assessment. Participants would
sit facing a computer monitor with heads supported by a chin rest and an eye tracker ensuring a lack of overt
orienting. With eyes fixated on a central cross, the eccentricity at which an object can be accurately attended to
would be measured, with measurements taken for objects displayed at many angles radiating from the fixation
point. A map of the visual attentional field and the size of its area would be obtained for the purpose of compar-
ison.

After measuring visual attentional capacity, the auditory attentional capacity would be quantified. Participants
would be fitted with headphones playing two separate and simultaneous tracks of human speech, one in a male
voice and the other in a female voice, played monaurally to both ears to control for ear dominance. In other
6

words, each ear would hear the entirety of the stimuli and both ears would be simultaneously hearing the same
thing. Participants would be asked to press a button, with random assignment dictating which hand reacted to
which sex, whenever either speaker uttered the word the. The number of correct responses would be the ob-
tained measure here.

Another similar test of auditory attention would follow to remove the factor of vigilance and to further quantify
the abilities of the participants. Presented monaurally to both ears again through headphones, participants would
hear several ten-second vignettes featuring a set number of people. Again, the participant would be asked to
click a button when the word the was heard, but not asked to indicate which person said the word. A one-
button system would indicate any and all detections of the target. The participant would work through audio vi-
gnettes that increased the number of people speaking by one for each trial. Attentional capacity would be de-
fined as the highest number of speakers from which the participant can detect the word the with 80% accura-
cy.

One week later, at the same time of the same day of the week, the same group of participants would be retested
on the same attentional paradigms as the week before. Liguori, Grass, and Hughes (1999) found that caffeines
effects vary with the time of day and trait extraversion. Our use of consistent and non-consecutive timing is
meant to minimize the confounding effects of fatigue, time of day, and retest advantage. A manipulation of
arousal level would be added to this measure. Half of the introverts and half of the extraverts would be random-
ly selected to receive 200 milligrams of caffeine to increase arousal levels. The other halves of each group
would be given a sugar pill to control for placebo effects and also any test-retest effects inherent in the nature of
this study. Two hours later, at the approximate peak of the caffeines effect, participants would be tested on the
visual and audio tasks. The change in performance due to heightened arousal would be the intended measure-
ment.

Analyses
The difference in mean attentional scores between introverts and extraverts would be first to be analyzed. A t-
test would be sufficient to look for a significant difference in the groups performances on each measure. A sig-
nificant difference would be noteworthy, in that the two personality types have different attentional capacities.
A result showing the introverts to be significantly lower in capacity would justify this study greatly. Within
groups, comparing the performance on the three tests would quantify any differences between modalities of at-
tention.

Assuming a significant difference was found in the first between-groups analysis, comparing pre-treatment re-
sults to post-treatment results across personality types could tease out the effects of arousal on these attentional
capacities. If the introverts performance stays the same, their attentional capacity could be seen as independent
of arousal. If it improves, then attentional capacity does not interact with arousal in the accepted direction. If the
introverts performance worsens with stimulation, then this would support the current model.

An ANOVA would be used to look for main effects of stimulation and personality type along with the interac-
tion of these two variables on attentional capacity. Perhaps arousal has different effects on different levels of
extraversion. The literature has not been conclusive on this interaction regarding other cognitive tasks, so this
analysis has no expected result. Seeing no significant interaction would downplay the role of arousal on extra-
version.
7

Discussion
The purpose of this study would be to further enhance understanding of the mechanisms underlying the person-
ality trait extraversion. The currently accepted model of extraversion as a result of baseline arousal has been
shown to be limited. The model of attentional spotlight size as a function of arousal level is also up for reexam-
ination. More exploration into the underlying mechanisms of extraversion is necessary to better understand the
trait itself. The general consensus that increasing the arousal level of introverts adversely affects cognitive task
performance could be explained by a smaller attentional capacity that is overloaded by lower levels of stimuli
than the attentional systems of extraverts. The baseline attentional capacity hypothesis would also explain why
many introverts choose to consume caffeine to improve their cognitive performance and why their performance
may actually improve under higher physiological stimulation. Perhaps attentional capacity is not as linearly re-
lated to arousal as presently thought. Teasing out the effects of stimulation on the attentional capacities of intro-
verts and extraverts may lead to a better understanding of the personality trait extraversion, which may be medi-
ated more by attentional capacity than by arousal. We live in a world that is coming to a higher appreciation of
introverted personalities. With 1 in 85 newborns in the United States placing on the Autism Spectrum, the study
of introversion is of greater importance than ever before. This research aims to refine the decades old model of
the basis of trait extraversion.





BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES

Primary Investigator
Matthew Scott received his Ph.D. in cognitive psychology from the University of Washington. After a post-
doctoral internship at the Weyenhauser Institute for Cognitive Psychology, Yale University, he accepted his
current position as assistant professor in the psychology department of North Dakota State University. His pub-
lished research has sprung from the intersection of cognitive and personality psychology, where differences in
cognition among multiple personality types and traits have been mapped out.

Co-Investigator
Cheryl Barnes received her Ph.D. in social psychology from North Dakota State University and moved into her
position as assistant professor in that same department soon after. She has published several studies on the ef-
fects of personality traits on social interaction.

Senior Research Assistant
Salvatore Mendez is a Ph.D. candidate working directly with Dr. Scott. He has co-authored several of the pub-
lished articles from Dr. Scotts lab. Before beginning his pursuit of a doctoral degree, Salvatore was research
coordinator for Dr. Gary Klenpas of Georgetown Universitys Infant Development Lab.

8

BUDGET AND BUDGET JUSTIFICATION

TOTAL BUDGET: $33010
Stipend and Tuition for Salvatore Mendez: $27000
This amount will cover Mr. Mendezs annual tuition of $12000 and his annual stipend of $15000 for one year.

Research Participant Compensation: $4000
This will cover the costs of recruiting approximately half of our participants from outside the university. The
100 outside recruits will be paid $40 each for their time, estimated to be a total of four hours per person.

Travel Expenses: $2010
This money will cover the cost of the three named researchers attending the 2015 APA conference, where we
will present our findings to the attendees. The travel budget is a per diem of $90 per day per person plus three
round trip airfares at $400 each.




CURRENT AND PENDING SUPPORT
None



FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT, AND OTHER RESOURCES
No new facilities, equipment, or other resources are needed to complete this project



SPECIAL INFORMATION AND SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENTATION
None







9

REFERENCES CITED
Amir, T., Alghara, T., Aldhari, M., Alhassani, A., Bahry, G., & Alshibani, F. (2001). Effects of caffeine on vigi-
lance performance in introvert and extravert noncoffee drinkers. Social Behavior And Personality, 29(6),
617-624
Beauducel, A., Brocke, B., & Leue, A. (2006). Energetical bases of extraversion: Effort, arousal, EEG, and per-
formance. International Journal Of Psychophysiology, 62(2), 212-223.
Blumenthal, T. D. (2001). Extraversion, attention, and startle response reactivity. Personality And Individual
Differences, 31(4), 495-503.
Cassidy, G., & MacDonald, R. R. (2007). The effect of background music and background noise on the task
performance of introverts and extraverts. Psychology Of Music, 35(3), 517-537.
Dobbs, S., Furnham, A., & McClelland, A. (2011). The effect of background music and noise on the cognitive
test performance of introverts and extraverts. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25(2), 307-313.
Easterbrooke, J.A. (1959). The effect of emotion on cue utilization and the organization of behavior. Psycholog-
ical Review, 66, 187-201
Eysenck, H.J. (1967). The biological basis of personality. Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas
Fuller, A. R. (1978). Personality and paired-associate learning. International Journal Of Psychology, 13(2),
123.
Geen, R. G. (1984). Preferred stimulation levels in introverts and extroverts: Effects on arousal and perfor-
mance. Journal Of Personality And Social Psychology, 46(6), 1303-1312.
Kumari, V., Ffytche, D. H., Williams, S. R., & Gray, J. A. (2004). Personality Predicts Brain Responses to
Cognitive Demands. The Journal Of Neuroscience, 24(47), 10636-10641.
Liguori, A., Grass, J. A., & Hughes, J. R. (1999). Subjective effects of caffeine among introverts and extraverts
in the morning and evening. Experimental And Clinical Psychopharmacology, 7(3), 244-249.
Revelle, W., Humphreys, M. S., Simon, L., & Gilliland, K. (1980). The interactive effect of personality, time of
day, and caffeine: A test of the arousal model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 109(1), 1-
31.







10

GRADING RUBRIC

Rhetorical situation (90 points):
Responds to the audience (or RFP) with carefully constructed arguments
Fits all generic slots (situation, objectives, methods, qualifications, costs, benefits) or all slots asked for in the RFP.
Responds to hot button issues and has these developed as themes throughout the document
Employs effective transitions
Incorporates information that reflects careful research on the topic.

__ / 90 Points


Visual Design (45 points):
Professional design choices employed via C.R.A.P
All design choices show attention to consistency
Charts and graphs are used when appropriate
Professional Presentation is clear and present

__ / 45 Points

Grammar/Mechanics and Usage (15 points):
Point of view remains consistent throughout the document
Lists are employed when relevant
Professional language and tone is used throughout the document
Demonstrates careful attention to editing and proofreading

__ / 15 Points