The experiment used a 2X2 between-subjects factorial design. The first independent variable is the type of video (violent/nonviolent) the participants will be watching. The type of video was either violent or non-violent. Violent is defined as physical harm or force where someone is getting hurt. For example, the violent video involved an armed robbery at a convenience store where the perpetrator had a weapon and physically harmed the clerk at the convenience store. Nonviolent is defined as no physical harm is being done. For instance, at the nonviolent video involved a house robbery but no one was physically harm. The second independent variable is cued recall. The test would be of guided questions such as how many people were victimized? Where did the crime occur? Was there a weapon involved? To help participants with cued recall vs. free recall, which would be a free write about what the participants remembered. The dependent variable is the …show more content…
The videos were from YouTube. A computer and the projector would be used to demonstrate the videos. A timer would be used as a stopwatch from an iPhone. There would be two sets of questionnaire both containing eight questions regarding the videos and the last question would be in a form of Likert scale rating the level of violence and nonviolence the video was based. Some questions included in the cued recall was, how many people were victimized? How many perpetrators were involved? Describe what the perpetrators were wearing? Was there a weapon involved? Was anyone hurt? How did the perpetrators get away? After each video each participant was randomly assigned cued recall or free recall. Everyone would have a chance to do both the free recall and cued recall. Each participant must have a pen or pencil and it was asked before we conducted the study if anyone needed a pen or pencil to conduct this
A sample of children ranging from 4 to 13 years old are going to be asked to watch a Rainbow Brite video. The children will be randomly picked from a childcare center. To ensure that the children are going to be randomly assigned, the children will range in different age groups. The first group will consist of 4, 6, and 8 year olds. The second group will consist of 10,12, and 14 year olds. It would have to be a field experiment because you have to go out and collect the data.
In the experiment was conducted on 96 male students, decieved to believe the experiment was determining the effects of first impressions. During the experiment participants were blindly assigned another participant by number, to rate on their first impression (Cahoon & Edmonds, 1985). The group was then divided into two subgroups so no individual was in the same sub group as the person he rated. One subgroup remained in the neutral room with no weapons present, and the other subgroup was lead to a separate room where weapons were present (Cahoon & Edmonds, 1985). Explanations were offered for the weapons, based on the use for a public safety course either for self-defense or violent use of weapons (Cahoon & Edmonds, 1985). The particpants were then given false ratings of their first impression either negative, neutral, or positive (Cahoon & Edmonds, 1985). Participants were then told to complete a Behavioral Control Inventory (BCI) for the individual who had supposedly given them the rating (Cahoon & Edmonds, 1985). The responses on the BCI were used to determine the hostility and aggression expressed by the participants (Cahoon & Edmonds, 1985). The results showed that the presence of weapons had little to no effect on the BCI responses from the participants regardless of the supposed use of the weapons (Cahoon & Edmonds, 1985). The results did show that the responses on the BCI did depend on the false first impression rating received by participants (Cahoon & Edmonds, 1985). The results of the experiment may be more valid than those of the Berkowitz LePage experiment because the measure of aggression was more comprehensive with the use of the BCI rather than the shocks, and the explanation of the firearms were also better understood and posed less risk of alerting participants to the true purpose of the
To begin the experiment the Stanford Psychology department interviewed middle class, white males that were both physically and mentally healthy to pick 18 participants. It was decided who would play guards and who would be prisoners by the flip of a coin making nine guards and nine prisoners. The guards were taken in first to be told of what they could and could not do to the prisoners. The rules were guards weren’t allowed t o physically harm the prisoners and could only keep prisoners in “the hole” for a hour at a time. Given military like uniforms, whistles, and billy clubs the guards looked almost as if they worked in a real prison. As for the prisoners, real police surprised them at their homes and arrested them outside where others could see as if they were really criminals. They were then blindfolded and taken to the mock prison in the basement of a Stanford Psychology building that had been decorated to look like a prison where guards fingerprinted, deloused, and gave prisoners a number which they would be calle...
The research design that was employed by Martin for Sarah was a single-subject design. This is also called an A-B design. It simply means that the subject (Sarah) serves as her own control. There is no control group and experimental group in place, the data gathered is only from Sarah. It is a representation of her frequency of SIB (self-injurious behavior) over a four-day period with no intervention. Then an intervention is implemented which in this case a DRO or Differential Reinforcement of Other Behavior was chosen. That also took place over a period of four days and the frequency of her SIB behaviors was again recorded. That data was then compiled into a comprehensive chart to visually show the changes that occurred within that eight-day period.
An independent variable also know as the manipulative variable is something the experimenter has control over and can be manipulated. The dependent variable is what is affected and is measured in the experiment. In this investigation, our independent variable were the questions that were asked to each participant and our dependent variable were their responses. The participants each got the same question About how fast were the cars going when they hit each other? but the verb hit changed to smashed for the second condition. This question was asked because it was the same one Loftus and Palmer asked and in order to stay true to the original study we decided to deviate as less as possible. The participants responses were
This research aimed to examine the relationship between habitual media violence, the presence of weapon focus and information remembered correctly about a violent photograph in order to explore the possible effect desensitisation may have on eye witness testimony. Psychology undergraduates (N=32) completed a questionnaire regarding their violent media consumption habits before viewing a photograph for four seconds which depicted a male threatening a female with a weapon. Average eye fixation time was measured using an eye tracker, and participants’ memory of the photograph was measured using a questionnaire in order to determine what contextual details they could remember. Due to problems with calibration of the eye tracker, data collected was unreadable, and as a result the two variables were analysed. Habitual media violence exposure correlated positively with correct answers on the context questionnaire (p < .01), suggesting that there is a relationship between higher levels of violent media consumption and the amount of contextual information remembered about a violent photograph.
H30: The null hypothesis for the third research question was that the offender’s negative emotions did not influence him to commit murder.
The method was a lab experiment. The experimental group were the children that viewed the violent behavior of an adult acting aggressively towards the bobo doll, and the control group were the children who did not observe the violent behavior. The independent variable was the exposure to the violence, and the dependent variable was the children’s’ violent
In the criminal justice system it is imperative to understand why crime occurs in order to prevent them from happening. Researchers look for the cause of crime and experimental research is considered the best when determining cause and effect relationships. However, causality can never actually be proven only be hypothesized to a certain degree. Experimental research is used a top standard for the evaluation of other research methods as they are able to control the validity of the research both internal and external. Internal validity is the accuracy within the study itself while external validity is the ability to say the outcome is applicable to other groups. There are three main types of experimental research designs classical
Many cultivation theorists have studied this, acquiring data in the form of content analysis. They agree on a definition of a violent act, for example Gerbner in his study used the definition, "an overt expression of physical force against self or other, compelling action against ones will on pain of being hurt or killed, or actually hurting or killing" (Gunter and McAleer 1990:94). This is an objective definition that can then be used to count the number of violent acts in whatever is being observed. Halloran and Croll (1972) used this technique to establish the amount of violence on British television in comparison with that of American television. For one week in April 1971, they observed the news, fictional drama, current affairs and documentaries on BBC1 and ITV Midlands and counted the number of violent incidents using Gerbner’s definition of violence. It was found that on average, 56% of British programmes contained some violence with four incidents of violence per hour. This was in comparison with American television which contained some seven incidents of violence per hour and where it was considerably more prevalent than on British television (Gunter and McAleer 1990:97).
Variables in this experiment consisted of the independent variable is the one that is changed by the scientist, was the idea/words implemented during both experiments, the would be the people and the altering minds/thoughts of the people
There are two types of designs that fit with this experiment for the article "Knowing is Half the Battle." One of the type of design is the experimental design. A experimental design is a design that shows how one thing can affect another. For example, the dependent variable will have an effect on the independent variable. This also uses random selection for an experimental design. I choose this particular design because in the article it says that the participants were randomly design instead of choosing who was they want instead. This design is trying to prove why or how the stereotype threat of women has on low performance test scores. Second type of design I thought might fit with this article is the correlational design. This design defines as seeing how to
Research reliability was achieved by using his method as “observations are useful that they provide the researcher with the opportunity to collect large amount of rich data, the participant’s behavior and actions within a particular context” (Le, 2012, p.52). Mackey and Gass (2005, p.96) highlighted that commonly, the answers to questionnaires might be imprecise and unreliable. Hence, the main advantage of observing and collecting data was it enabled the researcher “see directly what people do without having to rely on what they say they do. Therefore, such data can provide a more objective account of events and behaviours than second-hand self-report data” (Dörnyei, 2007, p. 185). The lessons were filmed by the staffs in the centre. As the researcher was not present in the classes to film the lessons, it was difficult for her to recognise the small details of the lessons; however, the researcher found a way to reduce the limitations by positioning the camera in a good position. The camera was put in the corners of the classrooms to capture the full scenes of the lessons including the actions of teachers and students. Filming the lessons instead of observing them directly was a plus point for the whole study as the participants including the teachers and students were not affected by the presence of the researcher; therefore, they performed naturally as in normal lessons. In addition, the researcher
Asking myself the question will help me research whether observational learning or enactive learning is more beneficial to children and see how one or the other will improve their performance. My Independent variable will be two children who I will conduct the experiment on and my dependent variable will be which of the two learning systems will be more beneficial. For my first experiment I will have child number one observe a video on how to make a paper airplane and after the video let the child imitate what was observed to build the paper airplane. My second experiment I will then have the second child watch a person make a paper airplane and have the child build a paper airplane along with the instructor and see how well the child follows along in building the paper airplane. My hypothesis would be the child who is observing the video will be able to construct the paper airplane without any hesitations rather than the child who is watching and following along since the child could stumble upon confusion on whether or not the instructions were being followed.
... the children shown as exciting non-violent film. The conclusion was that exposure to violence is related to the acceptance of aggression.