Supplementary Material Online: Validation of Stimuli and Pre-test 1 & 2

In the existing literature, different methods to induce awe have been used (e.g. using a recall task or presenting a contextual manipulation) and different elicitors of awe have been documented by using qualitative data [1]. Studies in the domain of music perception have systematically investigated how different types of music induce different types of emotions [see for instance: 2]. In addition, neuroimaging studies have shown how crossmodal integration of visual and auditory information may underlie emotional experiences [3]. Still, a systematic study of the awe-inducing potential of different stimuli that are typically used in research on awe is still missing. For instance, it is unclear whether and how the specific combination of auditory (i.e., music) and visual (i.e., video) information contributes to feelings of awe. As a first starting point, in the first Pre-test we present a novel collection of video stimuli (available upon request from the first author), consisting of both natural phenomena (e.g., volcanoes, oceans, etc.) and of man-made phenomena (e.g., skyscrapers, wonders of the world, etc.) that induce feelings of awe and wonder to a different extent [1]. Following previous findings that high compared to low-arousing music elicits stronger feelings of happiness and can more readily induce the feeling of ‘chills’ [4,5], we also manipulated the arousal of the music accompanying the different videos, by including high vs. low arousing musical excerpts. We assessed the awe-inducing effects of the different stimuli that we created and relied on the natural variability in awe ratings across the different stimuli to investigate the relation between feelings of awe and body size perception.

Pre-test 1: Short Video Fragments Method Participants Data from 33 participants was included in the analysis (11 females; mean age = 34.0 years, SD = 7.1). All participants were recruited through Amazon’s Mechanical Turk online participation system and received 2 dollars for their participation. Participants gave online informed consent before participating and the study protocol was approved by the local ethics committee at the Psychology Department of the University of Amsterdam.

Stimuli and Experimental Procedure For the first pre-test 10 novel 60-seconds video stimuli were created. The videos were compiled based on longer Youtube fragments that were edited into shorter cuts by using IMovie. Five videos were related to natural phenomena (e.g. displaying shots from BBC , BBC Planet , BBC Ocean, Volcano eruptions) and five videos were related to manmade objects or activities (e.g. skydiving, rocket launch, sports victories, wonders of the world, demolition of skyscrapers). Videos were edited such that they contained approximately a similar number of perspective changes. Each video was combined with either low-arousing music and with high arousing music. Musical fragments were based on different excerpts from music by Sigur Ros. In a pre-test the different musical fragments were rated for valence and arousal by 26 participants who did not participate in pre-test 1 (16 males, 10 females; mean age = 34.4 years, SD = 10.0). The low-arousing musical fragments were rated as lower in arousal (mean = 37.4; 0 = not arousing at all, 100 = strongly arousing) compared to the high-arousing musical fragments (mean = 59.2), while the fragments did not differ in terms of valence (low

1 arousing = 63.6; high arousing = 66.5; 0 = very negative, 100 = very positive). Thus in total, we obtained 20 different videos according to a 2 (Low vs. High arousing music) x 2 (Natural vs. Man-related phenomena) design with 5 videos per category. In order to reduce the total duration of the experiment and to avoid boredom, each participant rated 10 videos. A pseudo-randomization was used such that each of the 10 different videos was presented to each participant only once. Participants were instructed to watch each video carefully and next they were required to rate their experience while watching the video. They completed three questions related to ‘awe’ (‘To what extent did watching this video induce ‘chills’ or ‘goose bumps’?’; ‘To what extent did you experience ‘awe’ while watching the video?’; ‘To what extent did you experience ‘wonder’ while watching the video?’), two questions related to ‘familiarity’ (‘To what extent did you recognize the video?’; ‘To what extent are you familiar with the video?’). In addition, participants were required to indicate their feelings of arousal and valence using a pictorial semantic differential scale [6]. A pictorial body size estimation task was used (see Figure 1), requiring participants to indicate how they perceived the size of their body with respect to the environment Furthermore, participants were required to indicate using a continuous visual analog scale (0 = not at all, 100 = very much) whether watching the video induced changes in their perception of time (‘While watching the movie, did time went slower or faster than usual?’), felt presence (‘While watching the movie, did you feel the presence of God?’), connectedness (‘While watching the movie, did you feel connected to the universe as a whole?’), feelings of uncertainty (‘While watching the movie, did you feel uncertain?’) and feelings of powerlessness (‘While watching the movie, did you feel powerlessness?’).

Results In a first analysis, we were interested in the relation between feelings of awe and the other variables. As can be seen in Supplementary Table 1, awe was positively correlated to valence, reflecting that more positive videos induced stronger feelings of awe. In addition, awe was negatively correlated to body perception, reflecting that videos that induced a strong sense of awe were accompanied by a tendency to perceive one’s body as smaller. Interestingly, awe was also highly correlated to ‘felt presence’ and ‘connectedness’, indicating that videos that induced a sense of awe also elicited the felt presence of a supernatural being and made participants feel more connected to the universe as a whole. No other significant correlations with awe were observed.

2 Supplementary Table 1: Cross-item correlations between the different video-ratings. * p < .05, **p < .001.

Awe Arousal Valence Familiar Body Time Uncertain Presence Connectedness

Awe 1

Arousal .18 1 Valence .66** -.21 1 Familiar -.38 .04 -.02 1 Body -.46* -.17 .02 .35 1

Time .19 .37 .27 -.16 .16 1 Uncertain -.22 .71** -.67** -.03 -.27 -.04 1 Powerlessness .07 .76** -.58** -.21 -.40 .03 .90** 1 Presence .85** .09 .77** -.21 -.31 .13 -.26 -.06 1 Connectedness .85** -.12 .89** -.27 -.25 .17 -.50** -.31 .91** 1

In a subsequent analysis we tested how feelings of awe were modulated as a function of the music accompanying the video (low or high arousing music) and as a function of the content of the video (displaying human-related phenomena or natural phenomena). To this end, the feelings of awe were analyzed using a ANOVA with Music (low vs. high arousing) and Scene (Human vs. Natural) as independent variables. The ratings for the different variables as a function of Music and Scene are presented in Supplementary Table 2. For feelings of awe, a main effect of Scene, F(1, 16) = 14.2, p = .002, h2 = .47, reflected that natural scenes induced stronger feelings of awe (mean = 47.9, SE = 2.2) compared to human-related phenomena (mean = 36.2, SE = 2.2). Music did not affect feelings of awe (F < 1).

3 Supplementary Table 2: Ratings of Awe, Arousal, Valence for the different videos, according to whether the videos were accompanied by low-arousing or high-arousing music and according to whether the videos displayed natural phenomena or man-made phenomena. Awe (1 = not awe-inducing, 100 = strongly awe inducing), Arousal (1 = Calm, 100 = highly arousing), Valence (1 = negative, 100 = positive), Familiarity (1 = unfamiliar, 100 = familiar), Body Perception (1 =small, 100 = large), Time (1 = slower than usual, 100 = faster than usual), Uncertainty (1 = Very Certain, 100 = very uncertain), Powerlessness (1 = Powerful, 100 = powerless), Felt Presence (1 = not at all, 100 = very much), Connectedness to Universe (1 = not at all, 100 = very much).

Awe Arousal Valence Familiarity Body Time Uncertain Power Presence Connectedness

Low Arousing Music - Natural Phenomena

EarthFlight 46.3 61.3 78.9 16.2 40.3 57.6 16.7 23.9 19.1 42.5

PlanetEarth1 48.3 43.8 72.8 11.7 29.5 41.2 15.5 23.6 21.5 40.6

PlanetEarth2 52.5 52.6 84.2 10.2 35.8 48.1 14.2 18.9 24.8 48.4

Ocean 46.1 40.4 69.4 12.7 40.3 47.4 12.5 16.1 14.3 32.7

Volcano 41.1 48.4 57.8 8.8 34.3 49.6 23.9 33.6 15.7 27.6

Low Arousing Music - Manmade Phenomena

Skydiving 39.8 63.6 62.5 45.3 41.6 47.1 25.9 28.5 15.8 27.2 Rocket Launch 38.6 48.1 67.6 18.5 36.9 49.7 10.7 16.4 13.1 31.6

Buildings 28.2 60.5 33.6 3.7 38.7 39.2 36.2 39.4 5.9 7.6

Sports 32.1 42.8 64.0 36.7 49.2 43.3 12.8 15.9 9.6 20.4

WorldWonders 34.0 38.7 61.8 24.2 35.6 44.3 14.4 16.2 13.3 21.8

High Arousing Music - Natural Phenomena

EarthFlight 48.6 47.1 67.5 8.9 44.3 52.9 9.2 20.0 15.5 34.4

PlanetEarth1 52.9 42.6 78.7 9.9 32.7 45.6 10.1 15.4 22.4 52.4

PlanetEarth2 52.6 43.1 74.3 13.6 37.9 47.6 11.1 20.4 17.8 39.8

Ocean 39.3 42.8 73.6 11.0 51.3 55.1 11.2 16.8 21.2 39.7

Volcano 51.3 67.8 51.9 11.2 32.6 45.0 24.5 39.5 20.0 28.2

High Arousing Music - Manmade Phenomena

Skydiving 49.7 72.2 72.2 25.9 37.6 59.9 26.4 31.3 21.2 34.5

4 Rocket Launch 46.4 66.2 66.9 18.6 38.2 52.2 18.6 28.8 15.5 28.9

Buildings 29.4 54.2 47.8 11.5 37.2 60.9 21.2 25.9 5.2 10.4

Sports 23.8 43.0 57.7 41.8 47.8 42.0 12.4 14.3 9.5 14.9

WorldWonders 40.0 55.0 71.5 7.3 47.0 52.5 15.9 19.1 14.7 27.9

Discussion The stimuli that were used in pre-test 1 differed in important respects from previous studies on awe: they consisted of relatively short fragments of 60 seconds, and included both natural and man-made phenomena. Feelings of awe were directly related to valence: more positive fragments induced stronger feelings of awe. Interestingly, though, feelings of awe were also strongly related to the felt presence of God and to feeling connected to the world as a whole. This finding is in direct line with the proposed association between feelings of awe, religious experiences and spiritual feelings [7,8,9,10]. Another interesting finding from the pre-test 1 is the observation that natural stimuli induced stronger feelings of awe than manmade phenomena. It could well be that human accomplishments, like skyscrapers or spaceflight, evoke a reflective sense of wonder [11,12]. However, these experiences fade compared to the sheer impact of natural beauty. We also found that the arousal level of the music accompanying the videos did not affect awe ratings, even though arousing music in itself has been associated to feeling of chills [4,5]. We observed a strong relation between feelings of awe and body size perception: participants tended to estimate their body as smaller with respect to the environment when experiencing stronger feelings of awe. Though previous studies have proposed that the experience of awe is also characterized by changes in time perception [13], surprise [14], and feelings of powerlessness and uncertainty [1,15], our findings do not provide direct support for such a relation. This may be related to the specific stimuli that were used in our study, which may have been less attention grabbing or novel than more naturalistic awe manipulations. Still the finding that perceived body size is related to feelings of awe provides support for the notion that changes in the perception of the self and one’s body may be central to awe experiences [16]. In the first pre-test we used relatively short video fragments, whereas previous studies on awe have used longer video fragments to induce awe (Piff et al., 2010; Valdesolo & Graham, 2014). Based on the first pre-test, the use of stimuli representing natural objects to induce feelings of awe seems warranted. Accordingly, in a second pre-test we assessed the awe-inducing characteristics of longer video stimuli that have been used in previous studies.

Pre-test 2: Long video fragments Method Participants In the second pre-test 21 different participants (19 women; mean age = 20.6 years, SD = 2.1) rated the videos. All participants were students at the University of Amsterdam and participated for course credits. The study was approved by the local ethics committee.

Stimuli and Experimental Procedure

5 The awe video consisted of a trailer for a BBC Planet Earth documentary [for similar experimental manipulation, see: 16,17]. The video pictured panoramic views of nature, mostly consisting of vast objects such as mountains, waterfalls, oceans, and valleys, and partly slow-motioned scenes of animals. A positive control video represented cute animals (e.g., dogs, cats), and in the neutral control condition, a video was taken from a car on the motorway. All videos were approximately four and a half minutes long, and had the same background music (Sigur Rós – Hoppípolla). Participants rated the three different videos for awe, valence, arousal, funniness, neutrality and familiarity on a 7-point Likert scale (1 = not at all, 7 = very much).1

Results A significant main effect of Video on the awe-ratings was found, F(2, 40) = 11.0, p = .000, η2 = .36. As expected, participants tended to rate the awe video higher on ‘awe’ than the positive control video, t(20) = 1.8, p = .083, and than the neutral control video, t(20) = 4.1, p = .001 (see Supplementary Table 3). In addition a significant main effect of Video on the valence ratings was found, F(2, 40) = 45.6, p = .000, η2=.70: participants tended to rate the awe video lower on ‘valence’ than the positive control video, t(20) = -1.9, p =.072, but both the awe and the positive control video were rated as more positive than the neutral control video, t(20) > 6.9, p < .001. A main effect of Video on the arousal ratings, F(2, 40) = 16.4, p = .000, η2=0.45, reflected that the awe video and the positive control video were matched for arousal (t(20) < 1, ns.), but both videos were scored higher on arousal than the neutral control video, t(20) > 4.5, p < .001. As expected, a main effect of Video on the neutrality ratings, F(2, 40) = 22.6, p = .000, η2=0.53, reflected that the neutral control video was perceived to be more ‘neutral’ than the other two videos, t(20) > 5.8, p < .001. A main effect of Video on the funniness-ratings, F(2, 40) = 64.3, p = .000, η2=0.76, reflected that the positive control video was perceived as funnier than the other two videos, t(20) > 6.7, p < .001. The videos were matched for familiarity (F(2, 40) = 1.00, n.s.). In the second pre-test only a single item was used to measure feelings of awe (‘To what extent did the video induce feelings of awe?’ in Dutch: ‘In welke mate roept deze video bij jou het gevoel van ontzag op?’). Although the ratings for the different videos were in the expected direction, the measurement of ‘awe’ may have been sub-optimal, because the concept of ‘awe’ is difficult to literally translate in Dutch and may have been unfamiliar to most participants. Therefore, for the main studies we decided to use an 8-item scale to measure feelings of awe and wonder (see Appendix).

1 In addition, participants completed the Tellegen absorption scale (Tellegen & Atkinson, 1974), consisting of 34 items that were rated on a dichotomous scale (‘yes’ or ‘no’). Given the low number of participants in the second pre-test this scale was not included in the analysis.

6 Supplementary Table 3: Ratings of the different videos in the second pre-test (N = 21), for feelings of awe, valence, arousal, neutrality, familiarity and funniness.

Experimental Positive Control Neutral Control Video (BBC Nature) Video (Cute Animals) Video (Car on Motorway)

Awe 4.0 (1.9) 3.3 (1.6) 2.0 (1.3) Valence 5.8 (1.0) 6.1 (.80) 3.9 (1.1) Arousal 4.0 (1.4) 4.0 (1.5) 2.1 (1.5) Neutral 3.7 (1.9) 3.1 (1.3) 5.6 (1.4) Familiarity 2.0 (0.0) 2.0 (.2) 2.0 (.0) Funniness 2.4 (1.4) 4.9 (1.3) 1.2 (.5)

Discussion In the second pre-test we established the awe-inducing properties of the nature video that was used to induce feelings of awe in Study 1-3. The awe video induced stronger feelings of awe than the positive control and the neutral control video, while both the positive control and the awe video were matched for valence and arousal. Thereby the second pre-test warrants the use of these videos in the main studies. We note that all videos that were included in the pre-test and the ratings are available upon request from the first author.

References

1. Shiota MN, Keltner D, Mossman A (2007) The nature of awe: Elicitors, appraisals, and effects on self-concept. Cognition & Emotion 21: 944-963. 2. Zentner M, Grandjean D, Scherer KR (2008) Emotions evoked by the sound of music: Characterization, classification, and measurement. Emotion 8: 494-521. 3. Spreckelmeyer KN, Kutas M, Urbach TP, Altenmuller E, Munte TF (2006) Combined perception of emotion in pictures and musical sounds. Brain Research 1070: 160-170. 4. Salimpoor VN, Benovoy M, Longo G, Cooperstock JR, Zatorre RJ (2009) The Rewarding Aspects of Music Listening Are Related to Degree of Emotional Arousal. Plos One 4. 5. VieIllard S, Peretz I, Gosselin N, Khalfa S, Gagnon L, et al. (2008) Happy, sad, scary and peaceful musical excerpts for research on emotions. Cognition & Emotion 22: 720-752. 6. Bradley MM, Lang PJ (1994) Measuring emotion: the Self-Assessment Manikin and the Semantic Differential. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry 25: 49-59. 7. Keltner D, Haidt J (2003) Approaching awe, a moral, spiritual, and aesthetic emotion. Cognition & Emotion 17: 297-314. 8. Saroglou V, Buxant C, Tilquin J (2008) Positive emotions as leading to religion and spirituality. The Journal of Positive Psychology 3: 165-173. 9. Van Cappellen P, Saroglou V (2012) Awe Activates Religious and Spiritual Feelings and Behavioral Intentions. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality 4: 223-236. 10. Van Cappellen P, Saroglou V, Iweins C, Piovesana M, Fredrickson BL (2013) Self- transcendent positive emotions increase spirituality through basic world assumptions. Cognition & Emotion 27: 1378-1394. 11. Gallagher S, Reinerman-Jones L, Sollins B, Janz B (2014) Using a simulated environment to investigate experiences reported during space travel. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science 15. 12. Reinerman-Jones L, Sollins B, Gallagher S, Janz B (2013) Neurophenomenology: an integrated approach to exploring awe and wonder. South African Journal of Philosophy 32: 295-309.

7 13. Rudd M, Vohs KD, Aaker J (2012) Awe expands people's perception of time, alters decision making, and enhances well-being. Psychological Science 23: 1130-1136. 14. Maruskin LA, Thrash TM, Elliot AJ (2012) The Chills as a Psychological Construct: Content Universe, Factor Structure, Affective Composition, Elicitors, Trait Antecedents, and Consequences. Journal of personality and social psychology 103: 135-157. 15. Suedfeld P, Legkaia K, Brcic J (2010) Changes in the Hierarchy of Value References Associated With Flying in Space. Journal of Personality 78: 1411-1436. 16. Piff PK, Dietze P, Feinberg M, Stancato DM, Keltner D (2015) Awe, the small self, and prosocial behavior. Journal of personality and social psychology 108: 883-899. 17. Valdesolo P, Graham J (2014) Awe, Uncertainty, and Agency Detection. Psychological Science 25: 170-178.

8