Matching Items (35)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: psychology
- Creators: Schweitzer, Nicholas
- Member of: Theses and Dissertations
Description
Food-sharing is central to the human experience, involving biological and sociocultural functions. In small-scale societies, sharing food reduces variance in daily food-consumption, allowing effective risk-management, and creating networks of interdependence. It was hypothesized that trust and interdependence would be fostered between people who shared food. Recruiting 221 participants (51% Female, Mage = 19.31), sharing food was found to decrease trust and interdependence in a Trust Game with $3.00 and a Dictator Game with chocolates. Participants trusted the least and gave the fewest chocolates when sharing food. Contrary to lay beliefs about sharing food, breaking bread with strangers may hinder rather than foster trust and giving in situations where competition over limited resources is salient, or under one-shot scenarios where people are unlikely to see each other again in the future.
ContributorsGuevara Beltran, Diego Guevara (Author) / Aktipis, Athena C (Thesis advisor) / Kenrick, Douglas T. (Committee member) / Varnum, Michael C (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2020
Description
An expanse of research has demonstrated that persons with mental illness (PWMI) tend to avoid formal psychological treatment.One possible explanation for this failure to pursue formal treatment is the tendency of religious individuals to construe mental illness as spiritual in nature, leading religious communities to actively discourage emotional and psychological help-seeking through non-spiritual means. The present study examined help-seeking behaviors among religious PWMI by examining the impact of religiosity and gender on the relationship between mental illness stigma and help-seeking behaviors. Results indicate that higher levels of perceived stigma and religious salience relate to higher reported indirect support-seeking (ISS). Moreover, only religious salience appears to significantly relate to ISS among men, whereas perceived mental illness stigma significantly predicts direct and indirect support-seeking behaviors among women.
ContributorsMalouf, Laura Means (Author) / Mickelson, Kristin (Thesis advisor) / Hall, Deborah (Committee member) / Schweitzer, Nicholas (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2020
Description
In a trial, jurors are asked to set aside their emotions and make judgments based solely on evidence. Research suggests jurors are not always capable of this, particularly when exposed to gruesome photographic evidence. However, previous research has not looked at the potentially moderating effect of when and for how long jurors are exposed to emotionally disturbing photographs, nor how many photographs they see. In two experiments I tested the impact of the timing of and extent of exposure to gruesome photographs on jurors’ emotions, verdicts, and punishment recommendations. In Study 1, I investigated the effect of timing and exposure duration to a single gruesome photograph of a victim in a murder case (no exposure, brief early exposure, brief late exposure, and prolonged exposure) on mock jurors’ emotions and case judgments. Prolonged exposure (relative to no or brief exposure, regardless of timing) increased disgust, which in turn was associated with harsher punishment. Contrary to previous research, the photograph manipulation did not influence verdicts. The results were mixed and inconclusive regarding brief early versus late exposure. In Study 2, I compared repeatedly viewing a single gruesome photograph to viewing a set of four similar, but unique gruesome photographs—holding the exposure time constant—to assess the impact of quantity of photos on jurors’ emotions and case judgments. Viewing multiple gruesome photos (relative to no photos) led to increase in guilty verdicts through increased disgust, replicating previous research. Viewing a single gruesome photo (relative to no photo) led to increase in guilty verdicts through disgust, differing from Study 1 findings. Viewing multiple gruesome photos and a single gruesome photo led to more disgust, compared to viewing no photo. However, differing from Study 1, gruesome photographs did not lead to an increase in punishment recommendations. There were no significant differences between exposure to a single or multiple gruesome photos on disgust, verdicts, or punishments. Overall, greater exposure to gruesome evidence led to increased disgust and punitiveness, relative to those with less exposure. However, jurors with greater exposure to the same or different photographs did not differ in reported emotions, verdicts, or punitiveness.
ContributorsBean, Samantha Rae (Author) / Salerno, Jessica M (Thesis advisor) / Schweitzer, Nicholas (Committee member) / Duran, Nicholas (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2020
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
Description
Humans are highly interdependent, living and working in close proximity with many others. From an affordance management perspective, the goal of social perception is to assess and manage potential opportunities and threats afforded by these close others. Social perceivers are thus often motivated to assess particular affordance-relevant characteristics in a target. Frequently, perceivers assess these characteristics via passive observation. Sometimes, however, making such an assessment via observation can be difficult. In these cases, perceivers may instead “affordance test”: actively manipulate the target’s circumstances to reveal (or notably not reveal) cues to the characteristic of interest. There are multiple factors hypothesized to affect whether a perceiver is more likely to passively observe or affordance test that characteristic, including factors related to the characteristic of interest, the situation, the perceiver, and the target. Here, four core hypotheses of this affordance testing framework are tested. In a Preliminary Study (analyzed N = 1301), Study 1 (analyzed N = 559), and Study 2 (analyzed N = 572), highly consistent correlational and experimental evidence was found in support of Hypothesis 1, that the less observable a characteristic is believed to be, the more likely a perceiver is to assess it via affordance testing. In the Preliminary Study, evidence supported Hypothesis 2, that the more important a characteristic is believed to be, the more likely it is to be affordance tested. In Studies 1 and 2, mixed evidence supported Hypothesis 3, that the more urgency or time pressure a perceiver feels, the more likely they are to assess the characteristic of interest via affordance testing. And in Studies 1 and 2, evidence did not support Hypothesis 4, that believed observability and felt urgency interact, such that even characteristics of moderate believed observability are highly likely to be affordance tested under higher felt urgency. Implications of these findings for the affordance testing framework, limitations of the studies, and potential future directions are discussed. In sum, the present work provides promising initial progress in understanding foundational factors that affect when perceivers are likely to affordance test—an important, yet previously understudied, component of the social information-seeking process.
ContributorsPick, Cari Marie (Author) / Neuberg, Steven L. (Thesis advisor) / Kenrick, Douglas T. (Committee member) / West, Stephen G. (Committee member) / Funder, David C. (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2021