1. Middlesex University Dubai
The Third United Arab Emirates Undergraduate Research Competition UGSRC - 1
Is Luck a Moody Mistress? A MANCOVA Analysis
Aditi Surendranath*, Department of Psychology, E-mail: aa2988@live.mdx.ac.uk
Zehra Ahmed, Department of Psychology, Joanna Sequeira, Department of Psychology, and
Sterin Mary Thomas, Department of Psychology
Middlesex University Dubai, P.O. Box 500697, Dubai, U.A.E.
Dr. Jakob Pietschnig (Mentor), Department of Psychology, Middlesex University, Dubai.
Abstract
The current study aimed at exploring the relationship between luck and mood, through the employment of a
planned manipulation. It was hypothesized that mood would be significantly affected when luck is
manipulated. The independent variables in this study were luck, with two conditions; lucky and unlucky,
and two time points; baseline and post manipulation. The dependent variables in this study have been
categorised into positive and negative mood, whereas belief in luck, measured by the Lucky Charms Scale,
behaved as the covariate for this analysis. 113 participants were approached through opportunistic sampling
for data collection. MANCOVA analysis revealed a significant interaction effect between positive mood
and condition (p = 0.41); however, no significant main effect was construed with reference to the time-
points, and the covariate. In case of negative affect, in spite of a significant interaction effect between
negative effect and the Lucky Charms covariate, findings could not be validated due to the involvement of
unexplainable artifacts, which have been speculated. Therefore, the hypothesis was accepted solely in case
of positive affect. Considering that past research in this domain is scarce, this study may be regarded as a
platform for future research.
1. INTRODUCTION
Superstitious beliefs have largely been studied in terms of their type, magnitude, manifestation, and
determinants. Moreover, superstitions are usually categorized into negative and positive for the purpose of
measurement in research. Luck is a crucial component of superstition, inclined towards the positive,
although present in the negative, and the two concepts have also been considered synonymous.
Additionally, luck as an element of superstitious belief has broadly been researched, with exploration into
its relationship with self efficacy, locus of control, performance, and personality and its elements [1].
Furthermore, belief in luck has been assessed through standardized questionnaires such as the Paranormal
Belief Scale (PBS), and the Lucky Charms Scale [2]; [3].
Furthermore, mood can be described as a temporary yet prevalent psychological state, which can be
characterized by emotions such as sadness, anger or elation [4]. Moreover, luck and mood as separate
constructs have often been studied in isolation; with mood as a psychological construct has also been
extensively investigated in terms of its relationship with performance and cognitive processing. For
instance, the Affect-Infusion model is explanative of the influence of mood in information processing,
especially in situations perceived as complex and uncertain by the individual, thereby affecting judgment
and behaviour [5]. Additionally, the various correlates of mood pertaining to its states, antecedents and
impact have also been studied [6]. Luck on the other hand, a concept related to superstition specifically has
often been sidetracked, with more prominent and unusual superstitious beliefs overshadowing it, in spite of
its recurrent nature. However, it has most prominently been researched in relation to locus of control, or the
extent to which individuals perceive outcomes as results of either their own behaviour, or external and
uncontrollable factors [7]. Studies conclude that belief in luck is strongly correlated to external loci of
control, rather than internal loci of control, implying the tendency of superstitious individuals to attribute
deficiencies in performance, personality or events to the external factor of luck [8].
However, there has been one area of research which appears to be only lightly touched upon, or too specific
in instrumentality - the relationship of luck with mood. Research in the past has often dealt with the one
dimensional relationship between superstitious beliefs and mood, often establishing a causal relationship
between good moods and susceptibility to beliefs in superstition and luck [9]. Moreover, more complex
aspects relating to mood and superstitious beliefs have also been investigated; for example, belief in luck
pertaining to gambling may be associated with a particular pattern of the existence of prolonged depressive

2. Middlesex University Dubai
The Third United Arab Emirates Undergraduate Research CompetitionUGSRC - 2
moods, as concluded in studies among Swedish gamblers [10]. In addition, [11] also explored the effect of
mood on belief in intuition and the attraction of good luck in particular, which has been used widely in the
field of Positive Psychology. Furthermore, demographic aspects of superstitious beliefs, relating to gender
and cultural variation have also been studied [12].
The consistent trend in previous research is suggestive of certain shortcomings in the examination of the
relationship between mood and superstitious belief. Although the effect of the former on the latter has been
studied, the effect of exposure to a superstitious element on mood; the reverse remains to be explored.
Moreover, studies in the past have ignored the status of current belief in superstition and luck on mood, in
addition to being focused on superstitions with negative connotations [13].
Therefore, for the purpose of fulfilling the apparent gap in research, the current study aims at exploring the
relationship between superstitious belief, luck, and mood, through the employment of a planned
manipulation, for the purpose of which, a questionnaire has been designed and presented. Furthermore, the
study seeks to discover whether mood will be significantly affected by introduction to a situation where
luck is central, hypothesizing that there will be a significant effect on mood with exposure to a situation
where luck is manipulated.
2. METHOD
2.1 Design
The study employed a mixed measures model, where the repeated measures component pertained to the
time points, and the between groups component pertained to the conditions which were manipulated. The
independent variables were, luck, possessing two levels, lucky and unlucky, and the two time points; at
baseline and post manipulation. Further, the dependent variable was mood, categorized into positive and
negative mood. Lastly, belief in luck behaved as the covariate for this analysis.
2.2 Participants
113 participants, 41 male and 72 female, across various ages and nationalities, were recruited through the
method opportunistic sampling from the premises of Knowledge Village, Dubai.
2.3 Materials
 The baseline mood and post-manipulation mood was assessed through the Positive and
Negative Affect Scale (PANAS) [14]. The PANAS is a twenty item questionnaire measuring
present mood states, where participants indicate responses on a five point Likert Scale,
ranging from 'Very slightly or not at all,' to 'Extremely.'
Example: Interested 1 2 3 4 5
 The planned manipulation; Let’s Get Lucky (LGL), was designed to measure the participant
luck. The questionnaire consisted of a series of ten questions, involving simple mathematical
calculation. Each question had four options, behind which the correct answer was hidden,
and was revealed to the participants. Thereafter, the participants were divided into two
groups; ‘very lucky’ condition (nine answers correct) and ‘unlucky’ condition (one answer
correct). The allocation of the participants into the condition was determined by a coin toss
or 50 – 50 chance.
Example: (Fig. 1.)
Fig. 1. Example of Let’s Get Lucky Questionnaire item

3. Middlesex University Dubai
The Third United Arab Emirates Undergraduate Research Competition UGSRC - 3
 The Lucky Charms Scale [3] was presented to assess the magnitude of belief in superstitions. This scale
consisted of six items, three pertaining to negative superstitious beliefs, and three to positive
superstitious beliefs. Participants responded on a five point Likert Scale, anchored by 'Definitely No,'
and 'Definitely Yes.'
Example: Are you superstitious about the number 13?
2.4 Procedure:
The current study was approved by the Student Research Ethics Committee of Middlesex University, Dubai.
At the initial stage of this research, the questionnaire for the purpose of manipulation, Let's Get Lucky, (LGL) was
designed after which the PANAS and the Lucky Charms Scale was procured and formatted. Once ethical approval
was achieved, participants were approached on the premises of Knowledge Village. An Information Sheet with a
brief description of the study was provided after which consent was gained through the completion of a Consent
Form Thereafter, participants were allocated to the conditions of lucky and unlucky through a 50-50 chance basis,
which was determined through a coin toss. Participants were then given the questionnaire for completion. It was
instructed that they approach a primary researcher on completion of the first PANAS and LGL questionnaires, where
they were informed of their condition; lucky or unlucky. The pre-determined conditions were allocated after a
simulated check of the answers on the LGL, for the purpose of conditioning participants as perceiving themselves as
lucky or unlucky in this regard. Finally, when the participants completed the post-manipulation PANAS and the
Lucky Charms Scale, the questionnaires were re-collected by the researchers, and a Debriefing sheet outlining the
aim of this study was provided. The session took 10-15 minutes. The participants’ responses were stored in a hard
copy format in a confidential environment. Data was entered and screened on SPSS, after which a MANCOVA
analysis was conducted.
2.5 Statistical Analysis
A repeated measures MANCOVA was conducted twice; firstly for the positive affect, and secondly for the
negative affect. A Multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) is used as an extension to ANCOVA,
where there are continuous covariates, such as in this case the belief in luck. The responses collected from
all 113 participants were used.

4. Middlesex University Dubai
The Third United Arab Emirates Undergraduate Research CompetitionUGSRC - 4
3. RESULTS
Table 1. Descriptive Statistics
Condition: Lucky/Unlucky Mean Std. Deviation N
Positive Affect
PANAS 1
Unlucky
Lucky
32.78
33.04
7.245
7.127
59
54
Total 32.90 7.158 113
Positive Affect
PANAS 2
Unlucky
Lucky
32.69
35.28
7.753
7.510
59
54
Total 33.93 7.713 113
Negative Affect
PANAS 1
Unlucky
Lucky
20.17
21.50
7.091
7.999
59
54
Total 20.81 7.534 113
Negative Affect
PANAS 2
Unlucky
Lucky
19.29
19.63
7.717
7.920
59
54
Total 19.45 7.782 113
Table 1 represents the descriptive statistics and displays the means and standard deviations for
both positive and negative affect corresponding to the conditions of lucky and unlucky.
 A reliability test of the questionnaire was conducted which confirmed the reliability of the 46
items. 869.
 The analysis conducted in this study established the following results for both Positive and
Negative Affects;
3.1 Positive Affect
 Levene's Test of Homogeneity was insignificant, implying homogeneity of variance across
Positive Affect PANAS 1 and Positive Affect PANAS 2 respectively, F(1, 111) = .056, p = .813;
F(1, 111) = .073, p = .787.
 There was no significant main effect of 'positive affect' across the two time points; baseline and
post-manipulation, F(3,110) = .004, p = .950), ηρ2= .000
 Furthermore, it was observed that there was no significant interaction between the lucky charms
covariate and positive affect, F(3,110) = .665, p = .417), ηρ2= .006
 However, there was a significant interaction effect between positive affect and condition, F(3,110)
= 4.261, p = .041), ηρ2= .037, as represented in Graph 1.

5. Middlesex University Dubai
The Third United Arab Emirates Undergraduate Research Competition UGSRC - 5
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
Fig. 1. Graph - Interaction Effect between Positive Affect and Condition
3.2 Negative Affect
 Levene's Test of Homogeneity was insignificant which means that there was a homogeneity of
our variance across Negative Affect PANAS 1 and Negative Affect PANAS 2 respectively, F
(1, 111) = .312, p = .578); F(1, 111) = .199, p = .656.
 There was no significant main effect of 'negative affect' across the two time points; baseline
and post-manipulation, F(3,110) = 1.270, p = .262), ηρ2= .011
 Furthermore, it was observed that there was an unexplainable significant interaction between
the lucky charms covariate and negative affect, F(3,110) = 4.485, p = .030), ηρ2= .042
 Lastly, there was no significant interaction effect between negative affect and condition,
F(3,110) = .487, p = .487), ηρ2= .0
4. DISCUSSION
The study aimed at exploring the relationship between luck and mood, through the employment of a
planned manipulation. Furthermore, the study hypothesized that mood will be significantly affected by
introduction to a situation where luck is central, for the purpose of which, a questionnaire was designed and
presented. Based on the analysis of the results, it is apparent that the hypothesis was accepted in the case of
positive affect. Although it was observed that there were no significant main effects in case of positive
mood, there was a significant interaction effect between positive affect and condition; implying that
assignment of conditions, lucky and unlucky, played a vital role in manipulating positive mood across the
time points. This can be conversely associated with the findings of [4], who concluded that positive mood
affects belief in luck, whereas in the current scenario, luck appears to have an effect on positive mood.
Considering the descriptive statistics (Table 1) for positive affect, there is an apparent increase in the means
at baseline for the condition of lucky, from 33.04 to 35.28 at post-manipulation, whereas, no such increase
was witnessed in the unlucky condition. This partially confirms that luck had an impact on positive mood.
Furthermore, as per the interaction effect (Graph 1), it was established that

6. Middlesex University Dubai
The Third United Arab Emirates Undergraduate Research CompetitionUGSRC - 6
participants who were assigned to the lucky condition, displayed increased levels of positive mood in
comparison to baseline mood; this increase was not as evident in case of the participants assigned to the
unlucky condition. Moreover, this can be attributed to the theory that positive moods have the potential to
attract good luck, in this case being inclined to the factor of belief in luck itself [11].
In the case of negative affect, there was no significant main effect, which indicated a failure to accept the
hypothesis. Although there was no significant interaction effect between negative affect and condition,
there was an unexplainable significant interaction effect between negative affect and the covariate; the
belief in luck. When belief in luck was higher, as tested through the Lucky Charms Scale, the effect
displayed higher levels of negative mood; as seen at post manipulation. Although un-attributable to
concrete evidence, it is speculated that this phenomenon may be ascribed to the construct of individual loci
of control with relation to luck, as proposed in [12], and [8]. Therefore, for individuals displaying a higher
belief in luck, performance on the Let's Get Lucky questionnaire may have potentially been attributed to the
external factor of luck more intensely than individuals who displayed relatively lower levels of belief in
luck. Moreover, perhaps belief in luck may be generally associated with factors like prolonged depressive
moods, as concluded through studies on luck and gambling [10]. Further, an interesting occurrence that
surfaced was that the means of the negative affect, as visible in the descriptive statistics (Table 1),
decreased from the baseline 20.17, to 19.29 at post manipulation specifically in the unlucky condition.
However, this was not in accordance with the observed interaction effect, which can be interpreted as
negative affect increasing proportionately with belief in luck. With reference to the initial speculation in this
matter, this partially implies that individuals having a higher levels of superstitious beliefs, gauged by the
Lucky Charms Scale, when assigned to the unlucky condition, experienced steeper degrees of negative
moods due to their perception of their performance being attributed to the external and uncontrollable
factor, in this case, luck, rather than to the internal and controllable factors. Nevertheless, due to the
presence of artifacts that cannot be attributed, this effect does not get validated, and does not stand
independent of contradictions. Therefore, due to the lack of any evidence with regard to negative affect and
luck, this area of the study remains open to further speculation and future research.
A noticeable strength of this study was the effectiveness of the manipulation, which adequately conditioned
the participants, while simultaneously maintaining their interest. Further, the use of standardised
questionnaires with short questions facilitated continued attention, which provided for rich data. Apart
from this, the questionnaires were aptly chosen for this study, rendering it both valid and reliable. Limited
availability of research in the relationship between luck and mood provided for an open window to test this
novel idea, making it the first of its kind and the most significant strength of this study. Lastly this study has
the potential to be replicated with improvements into future studies.
However, certain limitations must also be noted. Firstly, the questionnaires did not provide for any culture
specification. Furthermore, an experimental design with random sampling, rather than opportunistic
sampling of participants may prove to be more appropriate to the nature of the study, and provide for more
comprehensive results. It is suggested that future research can inculcate the Lucky Charms Scale at
baseline. Further, it could also incorporate culture specific questions to aid different knowledge of luck,
while exploring mood through other measures such as the Paranormal Belief Scale (PBS) [2]. Lastly,
experimental designs could involve random sampling in a lab setting where there are more interactive
visual aesthetics for a more defined relationship between luck and mood.
CONCLUSION
The current study aimed at investigating the effects of luck on mood, which has been overlooked in past
research, through the employment of a mixed measures research design and a planned manipulation.
Results extracted through a statistical MANCOVA were conclusive of a definitive, significant effect of luck
on mood only in the case of positive affect, leading to partial acceptance of the hypothesis. However, there
were no significant main effects in this case, in addition to the absence of an interaction effect between
positive affect and the covariate of belief in luck. Nevertheless, although no main effects occurred in the
case of negative affect, an unprecedented interaction effect between the covariate and negative affect was
observed; although invalidated in this study due to the presence of unexplainable artifacts; however
speculated upon with the aid of past research related to loci of control. Therefore, this aspect of the study
remains open to speculation research, rendering the study a solid platform for future research and
replication. Lastly, attributions, strengths and weaknesses of the study have also been discussed.

7. Middlesex University Dubai
The Third United Arab Emirates Undergraduate Research Competition UGSRC - 7
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors of the current paper would appreciate and acknowledge the role of Dr. Lynda Hyland and Dr.
Eleni Petkari from Middlesex University Dubai, for their advice, expertise and insights on the data
collection, preparation and presentation of this research paper. We would also like to extend a thank you to
our colleague Fatema Irfan for assistance as part of this research, and to all participants for their co-
operation.
REFERENCES
[1] I. Damisch, B. Stoberock & T. Mussweiler. “Keep your fingers crossed! Superstition improves
performance.” Psychol. Sci., 21, pp. 1014-1020, 2010.
[2] J. Tobacyk & G. Millford. “Belief in paranormal phenomena: Assessment instrument development and
implications for personality functioning.” J Pers. Soc. Psychol., 44, pp. 648-655, 1983.
[3] R. Weisman & C. Watt. “Measuring superstitious belief: Why lucky charms matter.” Pers. Indiv.
Differ., 37, pp. 1533-1541, 2004.
[4] S. Dingfelder. “Good moods make some superstition prone.” Mon. Psychol, 38, 10, 2007.
[5] J. P. Forgas. “Mood and judgment: the affect infusion model (AIM).” Psychol. Bull., 117, pp. 39-66,
1995.
[6] W. N. Morris & P. P. Schnurr. Mood: A frame of mind. New York: Springer-Verlag Publishing, 1989.
[7] J. J. Ray. “Belief in luck and locus of control.”J. Soc. Psychol., 111, pp. 299-300, 1980.
[8] E. Sagone & M. E. De Caroli. “Locus of Control and Beliefs about Superstition and Luck in
Adolescents: What's their Relationship?” Proc. Soc. Behav. Sci., 140, pp. 318-323, 2014.
[9] L. King, C. M. Burton, J. A. Hicks & S. M. Drigotas. “Ghosts, UFOs, and magic: Positive affect and the
experiential system.” J. Pers. Soc. Psychol., 92, pp. 905-919, 2007.
[10] H. Kallmen, P. Andersson & A. Andren. “Are irrational beliefs and depressive mood more common
among problem gamblers than non-gamblers?” A survey study of Swedish problem gamblers and
controls. J. Gambling. Stud., 24, pp. 441-450, 2008.
[11] D. Kahneman. Thinking, fast and slow. United States of America: Farrar, Strauss and Giroux, 2011.
[12] N.D. Mundada. “Locus of control and superstition.” Intl. J. Human. Soc. Sci. Inv., 2, pp.1-4, 2011.
[13] T.R. Dudley. “The relationship between negative affect and paranormal belief.” Pers. Indiv. Differ.,
28, pp. 315-321, 2010.
[14] J. R. Crawford & J. D. Henry. “The positive and negative affect schedule (PANAS): Construct
validity, measurement properties and normative data in a large non-clinical sample.” J. Clin.
Psychol., 43, pp. 245-265, 2004.