Exam 6: Constructing Laboratory Experiments
When seeking random assignment of research participants:
D,E
In general, which of the following is NOT included in the skeletal framework for constructing an experiment?
[Figure 6.1; pp. 2-4] in the text
C
Explain the differences between an environmental manipulation and a social manipulation. Using the same variables, provide examples of each to demonstrate how they are different, and be sure to explain why your examples reflect an environmental and social manipulation.
Environmental manipulation and social manipulation are two different ways of influencing behavior or outcomes, and they involve different variables and methods.
Environmental manipulation involves changing the physical surroundings or conditions in which a behavior occurs in order to influence that behavior. This could include altering the layout of a room, changing the lighting, or introducing new stimuli. For example, if a company wants to encourage employees to take the stairs instead of the elevator, they could make the stairs more visually appealing by adding artwork or motivational messages along the stairwell.
On the other hand, social manipulation involves influencing behavior through social interactions, relationships, or dynamics. This could include peer pressure, social norms, or the use of authority figures. For example, if a teacher wants to encourage students to participate more in class discussions, they could strategically call on certain students to answer questions in order to create a social expectation for participation.
To demonstrate the differences between environmental and social manipulation using the same variables, let's consider the example of encouraging healthy eating habits in a workplace setting.
An environmental manipulation in this scenario could involve placing healthier food options at eye level in the cafeteria, while placing less healthy options on higher or lower shelves. This change in the physical environment is intended to make it easier for employees to choose healthier options without having to exert extra effort.
On the other hand, a social manipulation in the same scenario could involve creating a workplace wellness program that includes group activities and peer support for making healthier food choices. This social intervention relies on the influence of coworkers and the social pressure to participate in the program in order to encourage healthier eating habits.
In summary, environmental manipulation involves changing the physical environment to influence behavior, while social manipulation involves using social interactions and dynamics to achieve the same goal. Both methods can be effective in influencing behavior, but they operate through different mechanisms and variables.
When researching the effects of fear on people's tendency to affiliate with others, researchers wanted to verify that their fear induction manipulation actually made half of their participants more afraid during the study, so they wrote the following item, "how afraid do you feel right now," and mixed it in with other items on affective states. This item is:
To what extent do you think social simulations and role-playing scenarios risk inducing participants' idealizations or normative beliefs regarding the types of people they would like to be, or what they expect others to be like, rather than accurate representations of how participants would behave if the same situation occurred in real life? That is, in simulations and role-playing scenarios, are participants more likely to base their behavior on subjective (what others think you should do) and injunctive norms (what you think you ought to do), rather than descriptive norms (what you and other people actually do)? In other words, since simulations obviously occur in a controlled laboratory setting, are participants more likely to alter their behavior, even slightly, to improve the self-image they present to the experimenter, or to conform to certain group norms? How problematic is this possibility? How likely is this possibility?
Explain the "prisoner's dilemma game" (PDG). How can the PDG be a simulation or an analogue experiment? Provide two examples using the same variables to demonstrate your point, and be sure to explain how your examples reflect a simulation or analogue, respectively.
____(a)______ realism is the extent to which the experiment resembles what participants would encounter in everyday life, while ____(b)______ realism reflects participants' engagement in the study and whether they respond naturally and spontaneously as they would outside of the experiment.
Sometimes using a manipulation check to verify that your experimental treatment had its intended effect only undermines the efficacy of your treatment. For example, when people are primed to feel self-uncertainty, having participants report how uncertain they feel completely undoes the effect of the uncertainty prime. In other words, given the same manipulation, we see effects in the hypothesized direction when a manipulation check for uncertainty is not used; however, if a manipulation check is used, these effects disappear. If this is the case, how do we know that our manipulation is actually manipulating uncertainty, rather than some other construct entirely? How might we be able to assess the degree of people's uncertainty caused by our manipulation without explicitly asking them how uncertain they feel?
In a variation of the prisoner's dilemma game, participants are given $10 in "experimental chips" and asked to engage in an activity with two strangers (one of which was a computer program). At the beginning of the activity, each person's $10 is put into the collective pot. Then, in each round of 20 total rounds, participant members (two humans and a computer) had the option to withdraw none, some, or all of their money from the collective pot. The collective pot would then be replenished at a predetermined rate by the experimenter. If both human participants withdrew everything on the first round, they would end up with $9 (because of the computer participant). Thus, if participant 1 withdrew no money and participant 2 withdrew all $10, the pool would be replenished such that participant 2 could still withdraw more money the following round (i.e., participant 2 could come away with more money than she started with. This type of experiment is most likely: (circle all that apply)
Which of the following examples reflect types of experimental manipulations? (circle all that apply)
Researchers were interested in how people's perceptions of others can be influenced by knowledge regarding those others' consumption of limited resources. Specifically, they designed a study where participants were asked to imagine that they were responsible for their town's energy supply, which was displayed on a computer screen, and some people were already using too much. Participants were then shown (experimentally manipulated) profiles for all people in town and in each profile it included information about the person's individual consumption rate directly above the average consumption rate in the town. The dependent variable was a scale assessing how likely it was that the participant would be friends with each person-profile. This experiment is most likely a(n):
Which of the following would NOT be an example of a simulation?
Researchers wanted to examine the effects of nature (i.e., plants and animals) on people's mood. Provide an example of a stimulus manipulation that would accomplish this.
Altering the temperature in the laboratory for the length of an experiment is an example of:
Latané and Darley (1968) designed a study where they poured smoke into the laboratory waiting room and varied the number of other people in the room with each participant. In this example, they use a(n) _____(a)_____ manipulation, as part of a(n) _____(b)_____.
Explain the difference between experimental and mundane realism. Although establishing both is desirable, why might one be more important than the other?
You are interested in investigating whether the presence of extremely attractive people negatively influences participants' perspective taking ability. However, you have not decided on the best way to experimentally manipulate the "presence of extremely attractive people." How could you construct an environmental manipulation of the presence of extremely attractive people? What would a stimulus manipulation of attractive people look like? How could you create a priming manipulation of the presence of attractive people? Is it possible to design an instructional manipulation of the presence of attractive people? In this example, which type of manipulation do you think would be the most effective - why?
In a study of the effects of room temperature and experimenter gender on aggression, manipulating room temperature would represent what type(s) of experimental manipulation(s)? (circle all that apply)
In a study of emotional intelligence, participants were asked to view the eyes of several photographs of people's faces, and then rate how likely it was that they would want to be friends with the person they are currently viewing. The pictures that participants were shown exhibited 50 facial expressions, half positively valenced and half negatively valenced, of which only the eyes of those faces were visible (the rest of the face was obscured). Researchers found that participants with a higher emotional intelligence were more likely to befriend only those pictures of people with positive facial expressions (e.g., smiling), whereas people with low emotional intelligence were just as likely to want to befriend pictures of positive and negative facial expressions (e.g., smiling; grimacing). Varying the facial expressions of the photographs is most likely what type of experimental manipulation?
Filters
- Essay(0)
- Multiple Choice(0)
- Short Answer(0)
- True False(0)
- Matching(0)