Matching Items (4)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

151931-Thumbnail Image.png
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

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
134869-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
By providing vignettes with manipulated scientific evidence, this research examined if including more or less scientific detail affected decision-making in regards to the death penalty. Participants were randomly assigned one of the two manipulations (less science and more science) after reading a short scenario introducing the mock capital trial and

By providing vignettes with manipulated scientific evidence, this research examined if including more or less scientific detail affected decision-making in regards to the death penalty. Participants were randomly assigned one of the two manipulations (less science and more science) after reading a short scenario introducing the mock capital trial and their role as jury members. Survey respondents were told that a jury had previously found the defendant guilty and they would now deliberate the appropriate punishment. Before being exposed to the manipulation, respondents answered questions pertaining to their prior belief in the death penalty, as well as their level of support of procedural justice and science. These questions provided a baseline to compare to their sentencing decision. Participants were then asked what sentence they would impose \u2014 life in prison or death \u2014 and how the fMRI evidence presented by an expert witness for the defense affected their decision. Both quantitative and qualitative measures were used to identify how the level of scientific detail affected their decision. Our intended predictor variable (level of scientific detail) did not affect juror decision-making. In fact, the qualitative results revealed a variety of interpretations of the scientific evidence used both in favor of death and in favor of life. When looking at what did predict juror decision-making, gender, prior belief in the death penalty, and political ideology all were significant predictors. As in previous literature, the fMRI evidence in our study had mixed results with regards to implementation of the death penalty. This held true in both of our manipulations, showing that despite the level of detail in evidence intended for mitigation, jurors with preconceived notions may still disregard the evidence, and some jurors may even view it is aggravating and thus increase the likelihood of a death sentence for a defendant with such brain abnormalities.
ContributorsBerry, Megan Cheyenne (Author) / Fradella, Hank (Thesis director) / Pardini, Dustin (Committee member) / Department of Psychology (Contributor) / School of Life Sciences (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2016-12
154898-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
There is conflicting evidence regarding whether a biasing effect of neuroscientific evidence exists. Early research warned of such bias, but more recent papers dispute such claims, with some suggesting a bias only occurs in situations of relative judgment, but not in situations of absolute judgment. The current studies examined the

There is conflicting evidence regarding whether a biasing effect of neuroscientific evidence exists. Early research warned of such bias, but more recent papers dispute such claims, with some suggesting a bias only occurs in situations of relative judgment, but not in situations of absolute judgment. The current studies examined the neuroimage bias within both criminal and civil court case contexts, specifically exploring if a bias is dependent on the context in which the neuroimage evidence is presented (i.e. a single expert vs. opposing experts). In the first experiment 408 participants read a criminal court case summary in which either one expert witness testified (absolute judgment) or two experts testified (relative judgment). The experts presented neurological evidence in the form of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data and the evidence type varied between a brain image and a graph. A neuroimage bias was found, in that jurors who were exposed to two experts were more punitive when the prosecution presented the image and less punitive when the defense did. In the second experiment 240 participants read a summary of a civil court case in which either a single expert witness testified or two experts testified. The experts presented fMRI data to support or refute a claim of chronic pain and the evidence type again varied between image and graph. The expected neuroimage bias was not found, in that jurors were more likely to find in favor of the plaintiff when either side proffered the image, but more likely to find for the defense when only graphs were offered by the experts. These findings suggest that the introduction of neuroimages as evidence may affect jurors punitiveness in criminal cases, as well as liability decisions in civil cases and overall serves to illustrate that the influence of neuroscientific information on legal decision makers is more complex than originally thought.
ContributorsHafdahl, Riquel J (Author) / Schweitzer, Nicholas (Thesis advisor) / Salerno, Jessica (Committee member) / Neal, Tess (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2016
161796-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Sexual minorities use social media platforms at higher rates than heterosexual individuals, often to find and connect with other sexual minorities and the broader online LGBTQ+ community. These online connections may help normalize feelings and experiences as a sexual minority in a heterosexual-normed society by increasing exposure to more meaningful

Sexual minorities use social media platforms at higher rates than heterosexual individuals, often to find and connect with other sexual minorities and the broader online LGBTQ+ community. These online connections may help normalize feelings and experiences as a sexual minority in a heterosexual-normed society by increasing exposure to more meaningful reference groups and helping to mitigate the negative impact of heterosexist norms. There has been relatively little research investigating online social connectedness (OSC) among sexual minority adults, the relation between OSC and positive psychological outcomes, and the role of OSC in lessening the impact of heterosexist norms. The goal of the present thesis was to examine the relation between OSC and positive psychological outcomes, and whether such a relation is mediated by compulsory heterosexuality (CH; i.e., heterosexist norms) and internalized heterosexism (IH; i.e., internalizing and accepting heterosexist norms). A sample of 298 sexual minority adults in the U.S. completed an online survey that included measures of OSC, CH, IH, and positive psychological outcomes including resilience, well-being, self-acceptance, and self-esteem. The hypothesized model, with CH and IH as serial mediators of the relation between OSC and positive psychological outcomes, along with a series of alternative models, were tested using structural equation modeling. Support was found for the hypothesized model, such that greater OSC predicted lower CH, which then predicted lower IH, which in turn predicted greater positive psychological outcomes. While several alternative models had adequate fit, the hypothesized model was best supported statistically and by previous literature. These findings provide insights into the psychological benefits of social media connections for sexual minorities and the potential for OSC to lessen the impact of heterosexist norms. This study also adds to the existing literature regarding OSC and sexual minority adults, expanding the literature from primarily focusing on sexual minority youth. Future studies should be more socio-demographically diverse and longitudinal in nature in order to help better understand the directionality of the relationship between CH and IH. The present findings may also inform the development of interventions aimed at decreasing CH and IH, which future studies should investigate more fully.
ContributorsBaumel, Katie (Author) / Hall, Deborah (Thesis advisor) / Mickelson, Kristin (Committee member) / Salerno, Jessica (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2021