Diese Präsentation wurde erfolgreich gemeldet.
Die SlideShare-Präsentation wird heruntergeladen. ×

Psy 242 results powerpoint

Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Wird geladen in …3
×

Hier ansehen

1 von 7 Anzeige

Weitere Verwandte Inhalte

Ähnlich wie Psy 242 results powerpoint (20)

Anzeige

Psy 242 results powerpoint

  1. 1. Results • Descriptive Statistics – Means • Non-Mortality Salience Condition(Asked to write about dental pain) – Life Orientation Scale Mean (IV): 4.33 (6 point scale) – Death Anxiety Scale Mean (DV): 2.65 (6 point scale) • Mortality Salience Condition(Asked to write about death) – Life Orientation Scale Mean (IV): 4.34 (6 point scale) – Death Anxiety Scale Mean (DV): 3.48 (6 point scale)
  2. 2. ANOVA Results • An F-test indicated no significant main effect of Life Orientation Scores on Death Anxiety Scores (F(1,23) = 1.23, p = .41). Life Orientation was not manipulated in our study so there can be no comparison in terms of high and low Life Orientation Scores. • An F-test indicated no significant main effect of the Mortality Salience Manipulation on Death Anxiety Scores (F(1,23) = .78, p = .41). Those who were asked to write about death (M = 3.48) did not score significantly different than those who were asked to write about dental pain (M = 2.65). • An F-test showed no significant interaction effect between the Mortality Salience Manipulation and the Life Orientation Scores (F(1,23) = .19, p = .90).
  3. 3. Tables • I will add these to the presentation tomorrow
  4. 4. Discussion • Hypotheses – 1. Those who are manipulated to contemplate and write about death will score lower on the Death Anxiety Scale than those asked to write about dental pain due to the Terror Management Theory. – 2. Those who are optimistic will score lower on the Death Anxiety Scale (RDAS) and those who are pessimistic will score higher – 3. Those who are manipulated to think about death and are optimistic will score the lowest on the Death Anxiety Scale (RDAS).
  5. 5. Discussion (cont.) • None of our hypotheses were supported by the data analysis • The mean Death Anxiety score for those who contemplated death (M = 3.48) was higher than those who did not (M = 2.65). – This finding disproves our first hypothesis
  6. 6. Limitations • The small convenience sample used for our study (N= 24) may have been a factor in the failure of our study to find a significant result – A smaller sample ultimately means less power to detect small differences between the two samples of interest, more likely to commit Type I or Type II error • The design of our study was such that we could not manipulate the Life Orientation of participants. Instead, we used the Life Orientation Scale to gauge participant’s optimism/pessimism immediately prior to assessing their Death Anxiety ratings.
  7. 7. Implications/Conclusions • There is reason to replicate this study with more participants and a different methodology due to the existing literature on this topic. • We included Gender as a variable last minute, and our results seemed to show a small interaction effect between Gender and Life Orientation Scores – Direction for future research on this topic could explore the effects of Gender on Death Anxiety in combination with Optimism/Pessimism • Final Message; We found no support for any of our hypotheses. However, we believe with a larger sample size we could find significant effects at the .05 level.

×