Matching Items (28)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: psychology
- Creators: Salerno, Jessica
- Status: Published
Description
While acceptance towards same-sex marriage is gradually increasing, same-sex marriage is banned in many states within the United States. Laws that prohibit same-sex couples from marrying have been shown to increase feelings of depression, exclusion, and stigma for same-sex attracted individuals. The intention of this study was to explore the effect both pro- and anti-same-sex marriage advertisements have on heterosexual individuals' implicit attitudes towards same-sex couples. It was predicted that exposure to anti-same-sex advertisements would lead to viewing same-sex couples as more unpleasant and heterosexual couples as being more pleasant. However, heterosexual participants who viewed anti-same-sex marriage ads were more likely to rate heterosexual couples as being unpleasant and same-sex couples as pleasant. It is theorized that viewing anti-same-sex marriage advertisements led heterosexual individuals to report heterosexual stimuli as being more unpleasant compared to same-sex stimuli as a form of defensive processing.
ContributorsWalsh, Theodora Michelle (Author) / Newman, Matt (Thesis advisor) / Hall, Deborah (Committee member) / Salerno, Jessica (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2013
Description
Bully victimization has been associated with blunted cardiovascular responses to stress as well as elevated responses to stress. The difference between these altered physiological responses to stress is largely unknown. This study explored several possible moderators to the relationship between chronic stress and future cardiac output (an indicator of increased stress) in response to future stressors. These moderators include the difference between social and physical stressors and individual levels of loneliness. Participants were administered measures of loneliness and victimization history, and led to anticipate either a "social" (recorded speech) or "non-social" (pain tolerance test ) stressor, neither of which occurred. EKG and impedance cardiography were measured throughout the session. When anticipating both stressors, loneliness and victimization were associated with increased CO. A regression revealed a three-way interaction, with change in cardiac output depending on victimization history, loneliness, and condition in the physical stressor condition. Loneliness magnified the CO output levels of non-bullied individuals when facing a physical stressor. These results suggest that non- bullied participants high in loneliness are more stressed out when facing stressors, particularly stressors that are physically threatening in nature.
ContributorsHaneline, Magen (Author) / Newman, Matt (Thesis advisor) / Salerno, Jessica (Committee member) / Miller, Paul (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2013
Description
Interest in health and wellness has significantly increased in today's society. Living a healthy and active lifestyle is suggested to promote overall physical and psychological well-being. This study explored the effects of wearing a Fitbit Zip activity monitor and the impact of expressing mindfulness on levels of physical activity. It was predicted that expressing mindfulness, as measured by the use of present-tense language during the daily emotional writing task, would moderate the relationship between wearing a Fitbit Zip activity monitor and change in physical activity. Specifically, it was hypothesized daily monitoring would only lead to increased activity among those higher in mindful language. Over the course of five days, participants were asked to wear a Fitbit Zip and to complete a daily questionnaire and writing task at the end of each evening. On the last day of the study, participants completed a follow-up assessment, which suggested that the combination of wearing a Fitbit Zip activity monitor and expressing more mindfulness throughout the week increased levels of physical activity. An important issue for future research is to conduct this study for a longer period of time in order to get more variability in the data. However, despite the limitations of the design, these findings suggest that activity monitoring may be a promising way to promote healthy lifestyle change.
ContributorsTarachiu, Viorela (Author) / Newman, Matt L. (Thesis advisor) / Hall, Deborah (Committee member) / Salerno, Jessica (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2014
Description
Life History Theory suggests that, in order to maximize reproductive fitness, individuals make trade-offs between allocating resources to mating and parenting. These trade-offs are influenced by an individual's sex, life history strategy, and environment. Here, I explored the usefulness of a Life History Theory framework for understanding endorsement of child support laws. This study experimentally manipulated sex ratio, and gathered information about participants' endorsement of child support, sexual restrictedness, and mate value. As predicted, women endorsed child support more than men, whereas men favored greater restriction of child support in the form of required paternity testing. However, in general, results do not support an effect of sex ratio, sexual restrictedness, or mate value on endorsement of child support. Results suggest sensitivity to exploitation in a male-biased sex ratio, reflected by an increase in men's endorsement of paternity testing requirements under a male-biased sex ratio prime. Women, on the other hand, report especially unfavorable beliefs toward paternity testing in a male-biased sex ratio. Although results of the current study are mixed, there remains much to be gained from applying an evolutionary perspective to understanding variability in endorsement of child support.
ContributorsWilliams, Keelah (Author) / Neuberg, Steven L. (Thesis advisor) / Saks, Michael (Committee member) / Kenrick, Douglas (Committee member) / Ellman, Ira (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2013
Description
Previous research on experiences of the endowment effect and buyer's remorse has often failed to compare the two seemingly related phenomena. The current study attempts to provide a framework in which the two can be compared and to offer a possible suggestion as to when it may be beneficial to experience either the endowment effect or buyer's remorse, namely situations of resource scarcity versus abundance. The current study employed an online dating paradigm in which resource scarcity was operationalized as the sex ratio of users on the site. Two hundred and one participants were exposed to a favorable sex ratio, an unfavorable sex ratio, or a no information control condition and asked to bid on potential dates. Once matched with a potential date, participants were asked how willing they would be to give up their date and the minimum amount of points they would request to do so. These dependent variables served as indicators of experiences of the endowment effect or buyer's remorse. Results indicated that the sex ratio of the online dating site did not influence experiences of the endowment effect versus buyer's remorse. Potential mediators and moderators were also investigated although no significant effects were found. Possible reasons for the null results are discussed as well as future directions.
ContributorsMeyer, Kaitlin (Author) / Cohen, Adam B. (Thesis advisor) / Kenrick, Douglas (Committee member) / Neuberg, Steven (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2014
Description
A sample of 193 participants viewed one of six variations of an eyewitness giving mock testimony. Each participant viewed testimony, which varied by level of emotion (none, moderate, or high) and frame (waist-up or head only). Participants then rated the witness using the Brodsky Witness Credibility Scale and the Reyson Likability Scale. A set of ANOVA's was performed revealing an effect of emotion level on both credibility and likability. Emotion level was found to influence participant judgments of poise, however, to a lesser degree than judgments of credibility and likability. These results suggest that attorneys may want to avoid the use of videoconferencing with certain types of witnesses where testimony may be highly emotional.
ContributorsHavener, Shannon (Author) / Schweitzer, Nicholas (Thesis advisor) / Salerno, Jessica (Committee member) / Hall, Deborah (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2014
Description
Envy may be an emotion shaped by evolution to resolve large resource disparities in zero-sum ancestral environments. Previous research has found evidence for two types of envy: benign envy, which drives greater effort and self-improvement; and malicious envy, which drives hostility toward the better-off target. We predicted that perceived resource scarcity would stoke either type, moderated by individual differences. Specifically, we predicted that high self-esteem would steer people toward benign envy and self-improvement, whereas narcissism would spark malicious envy. After completing the Rosenberg self-esteem scale and the Narcissism Personality Inventory (NPI-16), participants were randomly assigned to either read an article detailing severe cuts to university financial aid budgets (scarcity) or an article summarizing various forms of financial aid (control). Each article ended with the same envy-inducing paragraph about a particularly affluent scholarship-winner, after which participants completed a measure of both envy types, capturing feelings, appraisals, and behavioral tendencies. Results show that self-esteem predicts less malicious envy, while narcissism and scarcity predict more. Self-esteem and narcissism interact such that self-esteem dampens the effect of narcissism on malicious envy. Self-esteem predicted benign envy when narcissism was low, but not when it was high.
ContributorsDuarte, Jose L (Author) / Shiota, Michelle N. (Thesis advisor) / Kwan, Sau Y (Committee member) / Kenrick, Douglas (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2011
Description
The purpose of this study was to examine mock jurors’ decision making in insanity cases. Specific instructions (vs. typical) juror instructions were tested to increase jurors’ comprehension of verdict options and reduce the effects of preexisting attitudes and reliance on cognitively biased thought processes in their legal decision making.
The specific instructions in this study were inspired by Fuzzy Trace Theory, which holds that simple language and visual aids that convey the ‘gist’ of complex information can help people make better decisions (Reyna & Brainerd, 1995). Participants (N= 496) were randomly assigned to one of two juror instruction conditions (specific vs. typical). All participants read a 10-page insanity defense case vignette, and were tasked with reaching a verdict. They were provided with 5 verdict options: Not Guilty, Guilty, and three different insanity options (Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity, Guilty but Mentally Ill, Guilty Except Insane). Results supported the hypothesis that jurors who received specific (vs. typical) instructions would comprehend more information about the available verdicts, and would be more likely to choose an insanity defense verdict. As expected, jurors’ preexisting attitudes toward the insanity defense influenced their verdicts. Although it was hypothesized that increasing jurors’ understanding would result in them relying less on their attitudes and motivated reasoning processes in reaching their legal judgments, the evidence did not support this. Results suggest more specific instructions that includes information about outcomes is preferred by jurors, and that they are better able to understand and perform their duties when provided with more useful information. However, further research is needed to identify methods for helping jurors rely less on biased reasoning processes in their legal judgments.
The specific instructions in this study were inspired by Fuzzy Trace Theory, which holds that simple language and visual aids that convey the ‘gist’ of complex information can help people make better decisions (Reyna & Brainerd, 1995). Participants (N= 496) were randomly assigned to one of two juror instruction conditions (specific vs. typical). All participants read a 10-page insanity defense case vignette, and were tasked with reaching a verdict. They were provided with 5 verdict options: Not Guilty, Guilty, and three different insanity options (Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity, Guilty but Mentally Ill, Guilty Except Insane). Results supported the hypothesis that jurors who received specific (vs. typical) instructions would comprehend more information about the available verdicts, and would be more likely to choose an insanity defense verdict. As expected, jurors’ preexisting attitudes toward the insanity defense influenced their verdicts. Although it was hypothesized that increasing jurors’ understanding would result in them relying less on their attitudes and motivated reasoning processes in reaching their legal judgments, the evidence did not support this. Results suggest more specific instructions that includes information about outcomes is preferred by jurors, and that they are better able to understand and perform their duties when provided with more useful information. However, further research is needed to identify methods for helping jurors rely less on biased reasoning processes in their legal judgments.
ContributorsHight, Morgan Leigh (Author) / Neal, Tess M (Thesis advisor) / Schweitzer, Nicholas (Committee member) / Salerno, Jessica (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
Description
Previous studies exploring variability in sentencing decisions have consistently found gender differences, such that women receive lighter sentences than men. In the proposed study, I present a new framework for understanding gender differences in sentencing preferences, including circumstances under which no gender differences should emerge. The Affordance Management Approach suggests that our minds are attuned to both group- and individual-level threats and opportunities that others afford us. I conceptualize the sentencing difference between men and women as driven by perceived affordances that assist or hinder an individual in achieving certain fundamental goals. When faced with sanctioning an offender in our community, the offender's sex, the victim's age, and environmental variables such as the ratio of men to women may influence our decision-making, because these factors have affordance implications. Thus, I hypothesized that individuals will express differences in the sentencing of offenders who commit assault, and that these differences vary by offender sex, victim age, and sex-ratio. The results indicate that, as predicted, female offenders received lighter sentencing than men when the offender committed an assault against a same-sex adult, but received equally punitive sentences as men when the assault was committed against a child. In general, results do not support a consistent effect of sex ratio as a factor when making sentencing decisions. Although results do not fully support the current study's specific hypotheses, there remains much to be gained from applying an affordance management perspective to understanding variability in sentencing between the sexes.
ContributorsUzzanti, Charlene Ann (Author) / Neuberg, Steven (Thesis director) / Knight, George (Committee member) / Salerno, Jessica (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of Criminology and Criminal Justice (Contributor) / Department of Psychology (Contributor)
Created2015-05
Description
This paper explores the idea of xenophilia and the circumstances under which it may occur. Xenophilia is the preference for an outgroup member over an ingroup member. This preference does not have to be amicable, and in fact can be exploitative under certain circumstances. Previous research indicates that xenophobia is much more common, but a few researchers have found support for the existence of xenophilia. To experimentally test the circumstances under which xenophilia might occur, I conducted a survey-based experiment on Amazon’s Mechanical Turk. This consisted of directed visualizations that manipulated participant goal (self-protection vs. mate acquisition) and the resources offered by both a fictitious outgroup and the hometown ingroup, followed by measures of ingroup/outgroup preference. I hypothesized that when the resource offered by the group addressed the participants’ goal, they would prefer the group with the “matched” resource—even if it was the outgroup providing that resource. My hypothesis was not supported, as the univariate analysis of variance for preference for the outgroup was not significant, F (2, 423) = .723, p = .486. This may have occurred because the goal manipulations were not strong enough to counteract the strong natural preference for ingroup members.
ContributorsDrury, Margaret E. (Author) / Neuberg, Steven (Thesis director) / Davis, Mary (Committee member) / Kenrick, Douglas (Committee member) / Department of Psychology (Contributor) / School of Life Sciences (Contributor) / School of Social and Behavioral Sciences (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2018-05