Creating a visual and auditory narrative-based event for a "streaming" platform that subtly manipulates affective stimuli to engage an unemployed or underemployed audience’s "stream of consciousness" requires careful ethical, methodological, and practical considerations. Below are research criteria DOs and DON’Ts to guide the design and implementation of such a study, ensuring scientific rigor while addressing ethical boundaries. The goal is to craft a narrative event that uses recognizable actors and subtle eye-line alterations (on-screen and off-screen) to influence attention and emotional engagement, targeting individuals unemployed for over six months.

---

Research Criteria: DOs

1. DO Define Clear Inclusion Criteria for Participants
   • Specify that participants must be unemployed or underemployed for at least six months, verified through self-report or employment records.
   • Include a psychological screening to assess emotional state (e.g., using validated scales like the Beck Depression Inventory or Perceived Stress Scale) to ensure participants are experiencing distress but are not at risk of severe mental health crises.
   • Ensure participants are adults (18+) with normal or corrected-to-normal vision and hearing to engage with visual and auditory stimuli effectively.
2. DO Use Ethical and Transparent Consent Processes
   • Obtain informed consent, clearly explaining the study involves watching streaming content with emotional stimuli but withholding specific details about eye-line alterations to avoid bias, as is standard in psychological research involving deception.
   • Disclose potential emotional impacts and provide access to mental health resources (e.g., counseling referrals) post-study.
   • Allow participants to withdraw at any time without penalty.
3. DO Design Subtle and Undetectable Eye-Line Alterations
   • Use actors resembling those from popular TV shows (e.g., similar facial features, voice, or mannerisms) to enhance familiarity and engagement without explicit recognition.
   • Implement minor eye-line shifts (e.g., 1–2 degrees off-center) on-screen, using techniques like post-production editing or CGI, ensuring alterations are below conscious detection thresholds based on prior eye-tracking studies (e.g., ~3 degrees for peripheral vision sensitivity).
   • Conduct off-screen eye-line tests by subtly manipulating environmental cues (e.g., lighting shifts or background motion) to draw attention away from the screen briefly, measuring gaze shifts via eye-tracking.
4. DO Employ Robust Psychophysiological Measures
   • Use eye-tracking technology to measure gaze patterns, fixation duration, and saccades to assess attention allocation and emotional engagement with the narrative.
   • Monitor heart rate and skin conductance to gauge emotional arousal and immersion, as these are validated indicators of narrative engagement.
   • Correlate physiological data with self-reported emotional engagement (e.g., via post-viewing questionnaires like the Narrative Engagement Scale) to validate findings.
5. DO Control for Narrative and Stimulus Properties
   • Develop a narrative with a clear emotional arc (e.g., suspense, empathy, or hope) to maximize engagement, using principles from cognitive film theory (e.g., Scene Perception and Event Comprehension Theory).
   • Balance low-level audiovisual features (e.g., brightness, sound frequency) and high-level narrative elements to isolate the impact of eye-line alterations, as narrative alone can drive physiological synchrony.
   • Pilot test stimuli to ensure alterations are undetectable and narrative is engaging for the target demographic.
6. DO Randomize and Counterbalance Conditions
   • Randomize presentation of altered vs. unaltered eye-line conditions to prevent order effects.
   • Counterbalance actor familiarity (e.g., highly similar vs. moderately similar to known TV actors) to control for recognition bias.
   • Use a within-subjects design where possible to reduce variability, comparing responses to altered and baseline stimuli within the same participant.
7. DO Analyze Data with Appropriate Statistical Methods
   • Use repeated-measures ANOVA or mixed-effects models to compare gaze patterns, physiological responses, and self-reported engagement across conditions.
   • Conduct post-hoc tests (e.g., Bonferroni-corrected) to identify specific effects of eye-line alterations.
   • Explore correlations between unemployment duration, emotional state, and engagement to contextualize findings.
8. DO Ensure Ecological Validity
   • Simulate a naturalistic streaming environment (e.g., participants watch on a laptop or TV in a comfortable setting) to mimic real-world viewing conditions.
   • Use content duration (e.g., 20–30 minutes) typical of streaming episodes to maintain engagement without fatigue.
9. DO Provide Debriefing and Follow-Up
   • Debrief participants post-study, revealing the use of eye-line alterations and explaining the research purpose in lay terms.
   • Offer follow-up surveys (e.g., one week later) to assess any lasting emotional effects and ensure participant well-being.
10. DO Collaborate with Interdisciplinary Experts
    • Involve psychologists, neuroscientists, and filmmakers to design stimuli and interpret data, ensuring alignment with affective processing and cinematographic principles.

---

Research Criteria: DON’Ts

1. DON’T Exploit Vulnerable Participants
   • Avoid targeting individuals in acute mental health crises or those unable to consent due to severe distress, as this risks exacerbating harm.
   • Do not withhold resources or support that could alleviate participants’ unemployment-related stress as a condition of participation.
2. DON’T Use Overtly Manipulative or Harmful Stimuli
   • Avoid narratives that reinforce hopelessness or despair, as these could worsen participants’ emotional state given their unemployment context.
   • Do not use high-intensity negative stimuli (e.g., graphic violence) that could trigger distress beyond what is ethically justifiable.
3. DON’T Neglect Ethical Oversight
   • Do not proceed without approval from an Institutional Review Board (IRB) or equivalent ethics committee, as studies involving deception and vulnerable populations require stringent review.
   • Avoid minimizing risks in consent forms or failing to provide adequate mental health support.
4. DON’T Overstate Alteration Effects
   • Do not assume eye-line alterations will uniformly “purloin” consciousness without empirical evidence, as individual differences (e.g., attention deficits) may moderate effects.
   • Avoid conflating physiological responses (e.g., heart rate synchrony) with conscious manipulation unless supported by behavioral data.
5. DON’T Ignore Individual Differences
   • Do not assume homogeneity in the unemployed audience; account for variations in age, gender, cultural background, and media literacy, as these influence affective processing.
   • Avoid ignoring prior media exposure (e.g., binge-watching habits) that may desensitize participants to narrative engagement.
6. DON’T Use Inappropriate Actors or Stimuli
   • Do not use actors identical to those in popular shows, as this risks copyright issues or explicit recognition, undermining subtlety.
   • Avoid stimuli that deviate significantly from typical streaming content (e.g., avant-garde visuals), as this reduces ecological validity.
7. DON’T Rely Solely on Self-Report Data
   • Do not use only questionnaires to assess engagement, as unemployed participants may underreport or overreport emotional states due to stigma or fatigue.
   • Avoid neglecting objective measures like eye-tracking or physiological data, which provide more reliable indicators of attention and arousal.
8. DON’T Conduct Uncontrolled Experiments
   • Do not present stimuli without a baseline condition (e.g., unaltered eye-lines) for comparison, as this prevents causal inference.
   • Avoid uncontrolled environmental variables (e.g., distractions in the viewing setting) that could confound results.
9. DON’T Misinterpret Physiological Data
   • Do not attribute heart rate or skin conductance changes solely to eye-line alterations without ruling out narrative or low-level stimulus effects.
   • Avoid overgeneralizing findings to all unemployed individuals, as the sample may not represent the broader population.
10. DON’T Neglect Long-Term Implications
    • Do not ignore potential long-term effects of repeated exposure to manipulative stimuli, even if subtle, as this could influence trust in media or emotional regulation.
    • Avoid publishing findings without discussing ethical implications for media design targeting vulnerable audiences.