Matching Items (13)
Filtering by
Description
A prior experiment by Li and colleagues found that when participants rated same sex faces in physical attractiveness, their self-reports of religiosity were higher in comparison to those that rated opposite sex faces. Could this be due to participants feeling their sexuality was threatened or misunderstood? In the current experiment, we attempted to replicate these findings and extend them by using a pseudo personality test that presented false feedback to participants. This feedback explained that their personalities were similar to homosexual or heterosexual people. Four hundred and fifty participants from Amazon Mturk were randomized into these conditions. We also measured homophobia, moral values, and the believability of the experiment. Results displayed no replication of the original findings. Men were more homophobic than women, while displaying lower moral values and religiosity. Those that self-reported being more homophobic also reported being more religious and moral. In conditions of sexual threat (homosexual personality, same sex faces) and sexual comfort (heterosexual personality, opposite sex faces), self-reports of moral values increased. Participants that reported believing the feedback displayed higher religiosity in both sexual threat and sexual comfort conditions. For a more concrete understanding of the relationship between religiosity, mating goals, and threats to sexuality, more research needs to be performed.
ContributorsHobaica, Steven Matthew (Author) / Cohen, Adam (Thesis director) / Knight, George (Committee member) / Neuberg, Steven (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of International Letters and Cultures (Contributor) / Department of Psychology (Contributor) / College of Public Programs (Contributor)
Created2014-12
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
The purpose of this thesis study was to examine whether the "war on cancer" metaphor influences cancer perception and treatment decision. A total of 249 undergraduates (152 females) from a large southwestern university participated in an online survey experiment and were either randomly assigned to the control condition (N=123) or to the war prime condition (N=126). Participants in the control condition did not receive the metaphor manipulation while participants in the war prime condition received the subtle "war on cancer" metaphor prime. After the prime was given, participants read a scenario, answered questions related to the situation, and responded to demographic questions. The results suggested that, compared to participants in the no-prime condition, participants exposed to the war metaphor were more likely to (a) view melanoma as an acute disease, (b) choose chemotherapy over molecular tests, and (c) prefer more aggressive treatment. These findings illustrated the unintended consequences of the "war on cancer" slogan. The results were encouraging and in the predicted direction, but the effect size was small. The discussion section described possible future directions for research.
ContributorsShangraw, Ann Mariah (Author) / Kwan, Virginia (Thesis director) / Neuberg, Steven (Committee member) / Cavanaugh Toft, Carolyn (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / Department of Psychology (Contributor)
Created2015-05
Description
Regular instances of employee and petty theft seem to suggest that stealing is common. Certain situations make stealing an advantageous opportunity, and studies show that most people will steal under the right conditions. However, these "right conditions" vary widely among individuals and are a combination of biological, social, psychological, and situational factors. In an attempt to better understand the rationality of stealing, our research team applied evolutionary psychology principles to a social experiment involving gift card theft. To find trends in how people will steal when given the opportunity, we attempted to create these "right conditions" (which we believed would encourage theft by minimizing cost) so that we could measure how a random sample of subjects (male students on the Tempe campus of Arizona State University) responded to variation in benefit. We predicted that if the cost was kept low, and if some gift cards conferred greater advantages than others (by possession greater value or utility), then the more advantageous gift cards would be stolen at a higher frequency from the sample pool than less advantageous ones. The results show that our assumptions were wrong. Theft almost never occurred and the few cards that were stolen were not the more "rational" choices as predicted. The experimental design indicates a flawed understanding of how the subjects weighed the benefits and costs of stealing gift cards. One major issue is that we failed to consider pro-social behavior as the norm. We also neglected the evolutionary benefits of cooperative behavior while overemphasizing the evolutionary benefits of theft. A more thorough and nuanced examination of the literature must be performed to avoid these fundamental flaws in the experiment in the future. The experiment also suffered from issues which might have inadvertently discouraged theft including the location, population, presence of other students, and time given to contemplate theft. If we wish to truly examine trends in theft to see if there is a trend towards the rational theft model we proposed, we must work with a population in which individuals already have a propensity to steal, the benefit is sufficiently high, and social pressures to be cooperative are low.
ContributorsKumar, Davina Sangitha (Author) / Angilletta, Michael (Thesis director) / Neuberg, Steven (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of Life Sciences (Contributor)
Created2015-05
Description
What characteristics do people prefer in potential mates? Previous studies have explored this question, discovering that preferred characteristics vary by people's sex and sexual strategy, but have implied that these preferences remain constant across the lifespan. We suggest, however, that systematic variation exists in individuals' mate preferences across the lifespan, as they shift their investments from mating toward parenting. We suggest that the characteristics of a potential mate can be viewed as affordances that assist or hinder an individual in achieving certain fundamental goals. Incorporating the framework of Life History Theory with this affordance-management approach to social behavior, we propose that an individual's life stage, sex, and life history strategy together serve as the basis for these goals and thereby shape the characteristics people seek in potential mates. Using data collected from participants aged 18-45 recruited on Amazon's Mechanical Turk, we tested a range of hypotheses derived from our approach. In general, results provide mixed support for a role of life stage in shaping mate preferences. For example, nurturance and social competence were viewed as more necessary characteristics in a mate by participants invested in parenting. Moreover, as their investment in mating increased, females expressed a greater preference for ambition in their potential mates, but males did not. Other predictions were not borne out, however, suggesting that there is still much to be learned from investigating the relationship between life stage and mate preferences.
ContributorsKalina, Catherine Ellen (Author) / Neuberg, Steven (Thesis director) / Glenberg, Arthur (Committee member) / Gangestad, Steven (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / Department of Psychology (Contributor) / T. Denny Sanford School of Social and Family Dynamics (Contributor) / Graduate College (Contributor)
Created2014-05
Description
The United States has become home to the largest incarcerated population in the world, containing 25% of the world's prisoners (NAACP, 2013). Within this population, young men of color appear to be severely overrepresented. This phenomenon can be better understood with the aid of a multi-disciplinary approach within the social sciences. Evolutionary theory is combined with multiple psychological and sociological perspectives, in order to more deeply understand the multi-level intersection of prejudice and discrimination against society's disadvantaged or vulnerable populations. A synthesis of the multiple theoretical angles of social dominance theory, affordance management, and life history theory is used to suggest a threat-based, attributional framework for understanding punitive decision-making and policy support. This conceptualization also considers the importance of the legal system in effecting social change. Future research within the legal arena is recommended to enable a more refined understanding of punitive ideology and implicit bias within the criminal justice system.
ContributorsLeiferman, Lindsay M (Author) / Szeli, Ãâ°va (Thesis director) / Gómez, Alan (Committee member) / Neuberg, Steven (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of Social Transformation (Contributor) / Department of Psychology (Contributor)
Created2014-05
Description
In the current study, the author investigated whether sociosexual orientation interacted with an experimental manipulation of sex ratios previously used by Li et al. (2010) which showed that men and women report greater religiosity after viewing profiles of attractive members of their own sex. The author predicted that only people of restricted sociosexual orientation would be reporting greater religiosity after viewing profiles of attractive members of their own sex. A sample of 171 undergraduate students (85 men, Mage = 19.5) from a large Southwestern university participated in the study for course credit. Participants were first administered the Sociosexual Orientation Index (Simpson & Gangestad, 1991). Then, under the pretense of assisting psychology faculty in designing a dating website for incoming students, participants viewed a set of profiles (photo and description) of either attractive men or attractive women, after which they answered a series of questions on a religiosity scale developed for the current study. Results showed that sociosexual orientation did not interact significantly with the experimental manipulation. Additionally, the results of the current study failed to replicate those of Li et al. (2010). The author discusses possibilities for why the results of the current study failed to replicate the results of Li et al., and for alternative explanations of the potential role of sociosexual orientation in responding to shifting sex ratios.
ContributorsCottengaim, Isaiah John (Author) / Cohen, Adam (Thesis director) / Neuberg, Steven (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of Social and Behavioral Sciences (Contributor)
Created2014-05
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
Description
The aim of this thesis was to explore whether major life changes can have a visual, perceptible impact on facial changes. The proposed mediation model suggested that changes in personality serve as a mediating factor between life experiences and facial changes throughout the lifetime. The proposed model was tested by examining (1) perceived personality changes, (2) perceived physical changes, and (3) major life changes in photos of individuals' old-aged faces compared to their respective younger faces. Participants in the current study viewed old and young photos of 29 Miss America pageant winners and rated how much each older face changed from its respective younger face on the following criteria: age change, overall change, personality change, and physical change. Responses were aggregated across participants for each target, and personality and physical items were separately composited into single measures of overall perceived personality change and overall perceived physical change. Results did not support the proposed model; however, some marginally significant correlations were found between the number of times the targets experienced a change in marital status and the appearance of being calm, feminine, and less changed in older age. However, these correlations were in the reverse direction from what was expected; further research is needed to understand how marital changes influence, and are influenced by, personality and physical changes. As a form of face perception, the processes underlying the proposed model are discussed in terms of possible social consequences. Further research is needed to explore whether changes in life events, such as the ones presented here, are related to specific facets of personality and physical changes, and how these perceptions translate to important social outcomes. Suggestions for future research pertaining to these issues are discussed.
ContributorsMichael, Kendra (Author) / Kwan, Virginia (Thesis director) / Knight, George (Committee member) / Neuberg, Steven (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / College of Liberal Arts and Sciences (Contributor)
Created2012-12
Description
Contextual cues can impact how statements are perceived. Specifically, they may be perceived as more aggressive than they otherwise would be. For the study, both medium of communication (in-person versus online) as well as how competitive the context was (non-competitive or competitive) were examined, with a bit of focus on gender. 130 Arizona State University students enrolled in Psychology 101 were surveyed; the mean age was 19.32 (SD = 1.43). A 2x2 factorial design was used, consisting of four possible conditions: In-person/Competitive, Online/Competitive, In-person/Non-Competitive, and Online/Non-Competitive. Participants read two scenarios, each featuring a target character who says an ambiguous statement, and each scenario with one of the four conditions at random. One scenario involved earning a promotion, and the other involved trying to win a voucher via mini-golf. After, participants answered questions regarding how they felt about the intent of the ambiguous statement, how the participant would feel in the scenario, and what kind of person the participant felt the target character was. Exploratory Factor Analysis with Principal Axis Factoring and Direct Oblimin Rotation was used to find outcome variables. We hypothesized that Perceived Aggression and Participant Negative Emotion would be higher in both the competitive condition as well as the online condition, and that Perceived Agreeableness would be higher in both the non-competitive condition as well as the in-person condition; this applied for both scenarios. The results were mostly not statistically significant, and contrary to the hypotheses, Perceived Aggression and Participant Negative Emotion were higher in the in-person condition than the online condition. However, as predicted, Perceived Agreeableness was higher for the in-person condition, and the competitive led to higher levels of Perceived Aggression and Participant Negative Emotion, along with lower levels of Perceived Agreeableness, as opposed to the non-competitive condition. Limitations included a small age range and only one type of online communication (instant messaging), along with the fact that the study was a survey. Future studies are needed to examine what factors affect perception of aggression, as very few have been conducted.
ContributorsRobins, Alexander Eric (Author) / Shiota, Michelle (Lani) (Thesis director) / Neuberg, Steven (Committee member) / Danvers, Alexander (Committee member) / Department of Psychology (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2016-05