The purpose of this study was to compare your decision to take the candy with the integrity level
you gave yourself on the survey. After taking the survey, you were separated into groups based on
whether you scored yourself as either low or high on integrity. You were then randomly assigned to take
either an easy or hard test. All but one participant were randomly assigned to receive fake low test scores.
The low scores ranged from 1/6 to 4/6. The participant with the lowest ID number was the only one who
received a fake high score of 5/6. After you had the chance to see your scores, we invited participants
with a score of 5/6 or higher to take a piece of candy. We intended for the participant with the high score
to take a piece of candy
…show more content…
Not
taking the candy was considered to be high integrity behavior. With the data we collect, we hope to get a
better understanding on whether people act in a way that is consistent with how they believe themselves
to be.
This study was deceptive in two ways. The first way was how we had falsely told you that we
were going to be measuring how your personality traits could influence your test taking strategies. We did
not tell you the true purpose of the study because we wanted to minimize what is called the social
desirability response bias, in which states that people tend to behave in a way that they think others will
approve of (Smith, Mackie, & Claypool, 2014). If you had known the true purpose of our study, you
would have foreknown that we would be observing your behavior. This could have caused you to
purposefully behave in a way you thought would be acceptable to us, which would not accurately reflect
your true level of your integrity. Another way we used deception was in how we gave you a fake score on
your math test. The math test was only used to see if the difficulty of a task would influence your
…show more content…
If you would like to know
what your perceived integrity level was, please let one of us know in person while you still have your
assigned ID number with you. You may also experience a mild decrease in self-esteem if you felt the
math test was difficult to complete during allotted time frame. Please remember that your performance on
the math test is not a measure of your competence level. We want to ensure you that the results of this
study will not be tied to your name or person in any way and are only tied to the ID number you have
represented. We also want to reassure you that your behavior within the study does not define your
character or your worth as a person and could just be due to the situation rather than any personality
characteristics. However, if you have concerns about your rights as a participant in this experiment, please
contact The Human Participants Review Board (HPRB) at Pacific Lutheran University at hprb@plu.edu.
You are also invited to the Psychology Student Research Conference on May 18th at 4:00pm - 6:30pm
While this study did not produce the result we wanted, we believe that we could use the information learned from this study and develop a study that would be more effective.
Repeated testing may lead to better or worse performance. Changes in performance on the test may be due to prior experience with the test and not to the independent variable. In addition, repeated testing fatigues the subjects, and their performance declines as a result (Jackson, 2012). Because the professor is interested in determining if the implementation of weekly quizzes would improve test scores, an experimenter and/or an instrumentation effect may also affect results. In a single group post-test only design, possible confounds include the lack of a comparison group and the absence of an equivalent control group.
Some students simply do not test well, others try their hardest and still cannot reach the impracticable standards set for them. The individuals who create these tests do not understand the pressures of being a student, or the struggle to answer thirty-five questions in a compressed time period. One test cannot accurately measure the intelligence of a student.
In the article “Success Will Come and Go, But Integrity is Forever” by Amy Rees Anderson, Amy gives her definition of integrity and includes experiences she has witnessed as an entrepreneur and counselor. Amy’s definition of integrity is “doing the right thing at all times and in all circumstances, whether or not anyone is watching.” This is the best way to explain integrity; just as I have experienced recently in my Business Law class. During a test, there was no supervision and a lot of students put aside their integrity and put themselves and others in a difficult situation. The author goes on to say that “It takes having the courage to do the right thing, no matter what the consequences will be.” The majority of the students who did cheated confessed to their faults. It takes a long time to build integrity, especially in educational setting like college. Most classes last around 5 months each semester and according to Amy, integrity takes years to build. Within one class, the class integrity was lost and I’m sure there is no real trust between the professor and student. If someone cheats once, it’s very possible that they will cheat again. Even ...
...t make the participants question and analyse themselves as to what kind of humans are they.
Tests cannot always measure everything that needs to be measured on a course or what a st...
Young, K. (n.d.). Pros: Standardized Testing. Michigan State University. Est. 1855. East Lansing, Michigan USA. Retrieved December 2, 2010, from https://www.msu.edu/~youngka7/pros.html
2. When you ask someone to participate, explain the basic nature of the study. You
...d for consent to proceed with the study. The participants were given thorough instructions that at any during the survey you can withdrawal your participation in the research, and that this is to benefit research to society. Participation is this survey was voluntary was emphasized. Participants were told that the surveys should take no longer than fifteen minutes and the personal information will remain confidential their results may be shared, but for research purposes only. The questionnaire will have a demographic sheet and a 50 item questionnaire divided into two sections. One part has a four point Likert scale (0= Almost Never, 1=Sometimes, 2= Often, 3 =Almost Always) and the other part is a selection of A or B. It was also reiterated that the participants had the right to withdraw from the research study at any time; there will be no consequences or penalty.
...to ensure results are a true representation of participant opinion. The researcher to share a clear account of the methods, data collection and analysis used in the study.
Kassin, S., Fein, S., & Markus, H. R. (2014). Social psychology (9th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Although the study had good intentions, I feel the study was unclear in its objectives.
A well created test can measure learning and diagnose a student’s weakness (Merrow, 4). In testing, the idea is for the student to get the correct answer on information they know and incorrect answers on the information they do not. However, a testing error may occur. A testing error is when a student gets an answer correct of information they did not actually know or an answer incorrect, they may have actually known (Gellman, 30)The people who create these tests want straightforward measures. However, test designers do not design these tests to measure what a student can do academically (Fusaro, 1). Large testing companies produce tests and sell them all over the country. This causes the test to be not specialized for the school or county and students do not do as well as they could have if the test was specialized (Popham, 4).three possible ways of testing a student’s knowledge exists: multiple choices, answer in essay form, or they are asked to perform a task and then graded on the performance (Merrow, 5). Some tests are designed to assess an individual’s performance, like an
Taking any type of personality test can lead to a lot of thought and reflection on yourself,