Matching Items (34)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: psychology
- All Subjects: Judgment (Logic)
- Creators: Schweitzer, Nicholas
Description
Concussion, or mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI), is a frequent cause of brain damage among youth and, therefore, represents a major public health problem. While most youth recover from concussion within 2 to 4 weeks, some concussed children and adolescents endure prolonged symptoms, along with mood disturbance sequelae for months. Few studies have assessed mood disturbance and concussion in pediatric populations. Additional research is necessary to understand pediatric concussion recovery and mood disturbance better, to guide early intervention efforts, and to improve pediatric concussion care. The purpose of this study was to examine how symptoms of mood disturbance (i.e., anxiety, depression, anger) and somatization relate to the odds of concussion recovery in male and female youth 12 to 17 years of age, who presented for neuropsychological evaluation after head injury. Significantly fewer females were deemed recovered at initial neuropsychological evaluation compared to males. Bivariate analyses of mood disturbance and somatization predictors revealed significant group differences in symptom burden between those determined recovered from concussion and those who had not recovered. Logistic regressions of each mood disturbance variable and somatization on concussion recovery suggested a modest decline in the odds of recovery as symptoms of mood disturbance or somatization increase. A multivariable logistic regression model of mood disturbance predictors, somatization, gender, and age was significant and explained over a quarter of the variance in concussion recovery; however, after a backward variable selection procedure, only depression and somatization symptoms were significant in the final model and accounted for a modest decline in the odds of concussion recovery at initial evaluation. Results replicate and extend research findings in pediatric concussion.
ContributorsBarros, Kathleen (Author) / Kinnier, Richard (Thesis advisor) / Kurpius, Sharon (Committee member) / Lavoie, Michael (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2021
Description
Depression has been found to be a major problem for young adults in college, with multiple studies indicating high prevalence rates for this population. College students struggling with depression suffer from various consequences, including academic impairment and suicidal ideation, with suicide being a leading cause of death for people in the typical age range for undergraduates. Grounded in cognitive behavior theory and humanistic theory, this study examined the intra and interpersonal factors related to depression among undergraduates. Specifically, the interrelations between friend social support, sense of belonging to the college, mattering to friends, hope, and depressive symptoms were explored. Sex and number of close friends were controlled for, as the literature also showed evidence of their significant relations to depression. The sample consisted of 177 undergraduates between the ages of 18 and 25 from a large southwestern university. Participants responded to an online survey. While participants represented a diverse range of ethnicities, the majority were White. Hierarchical multiple regression analyses revealed that hope and sense of belonging to the college negatively predicted depressive symptoms. Furthermore, through zero-order correlations, it was found that friend social support, sense of belonging to the college, mattering to friends, and hope were all positively correlated with each other. Implications for prevention and clinical practice include the roles that counselors, college personnel, and students play in the battle against depression.
ContributorsTang, Edwin (Author) / Robinson Kurpius, Sharon E (Thesis advisor) / Kinnier, Richard (Committee member) / Bludworth, James (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2021
Description
Risk assessments are key legal tools that can inform a number of legal decisions regarding parole sentencing and predict recidivism rates. Due to assessments being
historically performed by humans, they can be prone to bias and have come under various
amounts of scrutiny. The increased capability and application of machine learning
technology has lead the justice system to incorporate algorithms and codes to increase
accuracy and reliability. This study researched laypersons’ attitudes towards these algorithms
and how they would change when exposed to an algorithm that made errors in the risk
assessment process. Participants were tasked with reading two vignettes and answering a series
of questions to assess the differences in their perceptions towards machine learning and
clinician-based risk assessments. The research findings showed that individuals lent more trust
to clinicians and had more confidence in their assessments when compared to machines, but
were not significantly more punitive when it came to attributing blame and judgement for the
consequences of an incorrect risk assessment. Participants had a significantly more positive
attitude towards clinician-based risk assessments, noting their assessments as being more
reliable, informed, and trustworthy. Participants were also asked to come to a parole decision
using the assessment of either a clinician or machine learning algorithm at the end of the study
and rate their own confidence in their decision. Results found that participants were only
significantly less confident in their decision when exposed to previous instances of risk
assessments with error, but that there was no significant difference in their confidence based
solely on who conducted the assessment.
ContributorsMa, Angeline (Author) / Schweitzer, Nicholas (Thesis advisor) / Powell, Derek (Committee member) / Smalarz, Laura (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2023
Description
Several states within the United States have recently passed the Victim Life Photo Act, which allows prosecutors to present photographs of alleged murder victims when they were alive during the guilt phase of a trial. Critics argue that these photographs do not offer any relevant information about the crime or the defendant’s potential guilt and might bias jurors to vote guilty based on their sympathy for the victim—perhaps disproportionally so for high-status victims. Two mock trial experiments tested whether online participants who viewed alleged murder victim photographs would convict more because they increase anger, disgust, fear, sadness, and/or sympathy. Mock jurors who saw photographs of White (but not racial minority) victims while they were alive reported more sympathy for the victim relative to those who saw the same evidence without a photograph of the living victim—but the sympathy did not increase convictions (Study 1). Study 2 extended this study by testing whether the living victim photographs are more impactful in conjunction with seeing gruesome photographs of the victim after her death, creating a particularly disturbing contrast effect versus seeing the living photograph alone. Study 2 found that (a) living victim photographs on their own again had no effect on participants’ verdicts, (b) gruesome photographs on their own increased convictions through increased disgust, and (c) participants who saw both living and gruesome murder victim photographs (versus gruesome alone) were more conviction prone due to increased anger and sympathy. These studies inform current debates regarding the controversial Victim Life Photo Act: Admitting living victim photographs during the guilt phase—if presented along with gruesome photographs—can make jurors more sympathetic and angry, which can increase convictions.
ContributorsAdamoli, Madison Marie (Author) / Salerno, Jessica M (Thesis advisor) / Neal, Tess (Committee member) / Schweitzer, Nicholas (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2020