Matching Items (18)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: psychology
- Genre: Masters Thesis
- Creators: Salerno, Jessica
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
Research has suggested that lonely people demonstrate distinct differences from nonlonely people in their behaviors, mood, and interpersonal experiences. Lonely people who are also enduring a chronic pain condition may be at an especially high risk for negative outcomes because of simultaneous issues such as stigma, mood disturbances, and pain-related disability. The current study examined chronic and transitory loneliness in a sample of 123 chronic pain patients. Participants completed daily diaries assessing the occurrence of positive and negative interpersonal events, appraisals of interpersonal events, pain, and mood. Multilevel modeling was used to examine effects of being a lonely person as well as having a lonely episode on daily life. Results indicated that both chronic and transitory loneliness were associated with more frequent negative and less frequent positive interpersonal events, higher levels of pain, more negative and less positive affect, and more stress and less enjoyment from social interactions. Loneliness did not affect reactivity to negative interpersonal events, but did influence responsivity to positive interpersonal events such that lonely people had greater boosts in enjoyment when experiencing more positive interpersonal events than usual. These findings suggest that both lonely people and individuals experiencing a lonely episode experience more negative consequences in their daily lives than nonlonely people. However, they can benefit from engaging in more frequent positive interpersonal events, which can help to inform future clinical interventions for lonely, chronic pain patients.
ContributorsDempsey, Laurie (Author) / Davis, Mary (Thesis advisor) / Zautra, Alex (Committee member) / Doane, Leah (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2012
Description
It has recently been argued that high-confidence eyewitness identifications are highly likely to be accurate regardless of the quality of viewing conditions experienced by the witness. However, new evidence suggests that evaluators of eyewitness identification evidence (e.g., jurors) do not trust highly confident eyewitnesses who experienced poor witnessing conditions. In fact, contextual information about poor witnessing conditions decreases evaluators’ belief of eyewitnesses to a greater extent for highly confident witnesses than for moderately confident witnesses. Why is the effect of witnessing-condition information greater for evaluations of high-confidence witnesses than for less confident witnesses? The current research tested the possibility that information about witnessing conditions influences evaluators’ perceptions of how well-calibrated a witness’s identification confidence is with the eyewitness’s accuracy. Using a paradigm adapted from the confidence calibration literature, I conducted an experiment to test this calibration account of the finding that witnessing condition information has a stronger effect on perceptions of highly confident witnesses than moderately confident witnesses. Although the results replicated the differential effects of witnessing condition context on perceptions of highly and moderately confident eyewitnesses, they failed to yield support for the confidence calibration hypothesis, potentially because the confidence calibration manipulation was ineffective. Directions for future research are discussed.
ContributorsLebensfeld, Taylor Cameron (Author) / Smalarz, Laura (Thesis advisor) / Salerno, Jessica (Committee member) / Arndorfer, Andrea (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2022
Description
In the legal system, the prediction of a person’s risk of committing a crime has mostly been based on expert judgment. However, newer techniques that employ machine learning (ML)—a type of artificial intelligence—are being implemented throughout the justice system. Yet, there is a lack of research on how the public perceives and uses machine learning risk assessments in legal settings. In two mock-trial vignette studies, the perception of ML-based risk assessments versus more traditional methods was assessed. Study 1 was a 2 (severity of crime: low, high) x 2 (risk assessment type: expert, machine learning) x 2 (risk outcome: low, high) between-subjects design. Participants expressed ethical concerns and discouraged the use of machine learning risk assessments in sentencing decisions, but punishment recommendations were not affected. Study 2 was a within-subjects design where participants were randomly assigned read through one of three crime scenarios (violent, white-collar, sex offense) and one of three risk assessment techniques (expert, checklist, machine learning). Consistent with Study 1, participants had ethical concerns and disagreed with the use of machine learning risk assessments in bail decisions, yet their own decisions and recommendations did not reflect these concerns. Overall, laypeople express skepticism toward these new methods, but do not appear to differentially rely on ML-based versus traditional risk assessments in their own judgments.
ContributorsFine, Anna (Author) / Schweitzer, Nicholas (Thesis advisor) / Salerno, Jessica (Committee member) / Smalarz, Laura (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2021
Description
Evaluators of eyewitness evidence (e.g., judges, jurors) often must determine whether an eyewitness’s identification of a police suspect is accurate or mistaken. It has recently been argued that a particular class of variables—suspect-bias variables—pose a unique threat to the reliability of eyewitness identification evidence. Unlike “general impairment” variables that generally impair eyewitness identification accuracy (e.g., poor viewing conditions, biased lineup instructions), suspect-bias variables produce a suspect-specific bias that increases the risk of confident misidentifications of innocent suspects. The goal of this research was to examine evaluators’ sensitivity to suspect-bias variables compared to general impairment variables, and to test whether sensitivity to suspect-bias differs as a function of whether the suspect-bias variable is under the control of the legal system (system suspect-bias) or outside of the legal system’s control (estimator suspect-bias). Participant-evaluators (N = 214) read eight crime vignettes paired with one of four different eyewitness variables (system suspect-bias, estimator suspect-bias, general impairment, or no-variable control) and rated the accuracy of each eyewitness. Evaluators also explained the reasoning for their accuracy rating, and their explanations were coded for mentions of procedural suggestion, eyewitness memory strength, memory contamination, and general eyewitness (un)reliability. Evaluators appear to be more sensitive to general impairment variables than to suspect-bias variables. This finding is alarming, as suspect-bias variables pose a greater threat to eyewitness reliability than general-impairment variables. Implications for the collection and evaluation of eyewitness evidence are discussed.
ContributorsKulak, Kylie (Author) / Smalarz, Laura (Thesis advisor) / Salerno, Jessica (Committee member) / Schweitzer, Nick (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2022
Description
Civil juries are becoming an increasingly rare means of resolving civil disputes. One reason for this is widespread mistrust in jury decision-making do to highly publicized nuclear verdicts where verdicts do not seem to match the alleged harm suffered by a plaintiff. Critics allege that jurors are biased against defendants with deep pockets. This research aims to test whether there is evidence of so-called deep-pocket bias in juror decision-making. Previous research has compared how the wealth of defendants impacts jurors’ verdicts while other studies have compared how jurors’ verdicts are impacted when the defendant is an individual versus a corporation. The first aim is to explore the impact of defendant wealth and corporate identity on jurors’ liability verdicts and damage awards. The second aim is to explore whether the theory of dyadic morality helps to explain any potential observed deep-pocket biases. The study tested the hypothesis that perceptions of a defendant’s moral agency (in other words, their responsibility and intentionality) would predict jurors’ liability verdicts while perceptions of a defendant’s moral patiency (in other words, their vulnerability and capacity for suffering) would predict jurors’ damage awards. In a study of mock juror decision-making, results concluded that when assessing the same alleged wrongdoing and harm, jurors were more confident in a liable verdict against wealthy defendants and corporate defendants compared to poor defendants and individuals as defendants. Higher perceptions of a defendant’s moral agency did explain these effects. However, there was no evidence that defendant wealth or corporate identity influenced damage awards. Ultimately, in cases where plaintiffs portray themselves as a small and vulnerable “David” taking on a large and resourceful “Goliath,” juror decision-making on liability verdicts is likely to unfairly punish “Goliath” defendants, revealing deep-pocket biases against wealthy defendants and corporations.
ContributorsRosales, Breanna Olson (Author) / Schweitzer, Nicholas (Thesis advisor) / Salerno, Jessica (Thesis advisor) / Smalarz, Laura (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2024
Description
With its ever-increasing prevalence throughout the world, social media use has become a primary means of communication and connection with others. Much research has been dedicated to the topic of social media use, suggesting both positive and negative outcomes for those who are online more frequently. While uploading content and interacting with posts that others have created is associated with social comparison and identity formation, there is little research to date that examines the relationship between social media use and an individual’s meaning in life. One of the greater benefits of social media use is the ease with which people can curate their own personal identities, and this has led to an increase in users—particularly young adults—posting sexualized images of themselves for social gain. Untested in prior research is the relationship between self-objectification via social media and life meaning. For my thesis, I proposed a moderation model in which participants who reported higher levels of self-objectified beliefs and online habits would also report lower levels of meaning in life. Furthermore, I hypothesized that there would be unique differences between genders and sexual orientations that would also serve as moderators, such that heterosexual women and LGBQ men would demonstrate the lowest levels of life meaning when reporting high levels of self-objectification. Results from analyses found that while there was no significant relationship between active social media use and meaning in life, there was a significant three-way interaction between objectified social media use, gender and sexual orientation, and meaning. Findings from this study provide support for previous research that has found LGBQ men and heterosexual women face the most adverse effects from self-objectification. These results suggest that self-objectified social media use can negatively impact life meaning for certain populations.
ContributorsMostoller, Alexis (Author) / Mickelson, Kristin (Thesis advisor) / Salerno, Jessica (Committee member) / Burleson, Mary (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2022
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
Mood disorders are highly prevalent, especially in adolescent populations. One potential cause of the widespread nature of these disorders is the formation of stigma around emotionality. Emotion research, while extensive, has not expanded to capture how a parent’s emotion regulation and expression may lead to stigmatized behaviors in their child affecting that child’s mental health into adulthood. The current thesis aimed to investigate the relevance of this novel concept – emotionality stigma – in the relationship between parental emotionality and adult-child mental health. Using social learning theory, parental emotionality was predicted to influence a child’s emotionality into adulthood. Specifically, this thesis investigated if parental emotion over- and under-expression (dysregulation) would influence adult-children to perceive a stigma around emotionality leading to worse mental health, whereas well-regulated parental emotion expression would relate to adult-child emotional intelligence, leading to better mental health. Moreover, it was predicted that these relationships would differ depending on parent and child gender. To examine these ideas, data was collected from 1,136 college and community individuals through a university survey system and Amazon’s Mechanical Turk. Using a combination of linear regression, PROCESS, and Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) models, the results supported the proposed hypotheses. As predicted, parental dysregulation in childhood predicted impaired adult-child mental health, whereas parental regulation in childhood predicted lower levels of adult-child depression and anxiety. Additionally, emotionality stigma and emotional intelligence partially mediated the relationship between parental emotionality and adult-child mental health. Furthermore, results showed interesting gender differences; male participants were more impacted by both maternal and paternal emotionality as compared to female participants. These findings not only build on emotion research, but also have numerous applications in practice including improving parenting classes and family therapy interventions. This study is the first to explore the role of parental emotionality on adult-child mental health through stigma and emotional intelligence.
ContributorsSeely, Hayley (Author) / Mickelson, Kristin D. (Thesis advisor) / Salerno, Jessica (Committee member) / Roberts, Nicole (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2019