The document investigates whether providing additional information in a question can create response bias. The hypothesis is that subjects given a question with negative information about tattoos will be more likely to respond that they would not get a tattoo. Two random groups of 25 high school seniors were asked either a basic question or the same question with the additional negative information about tattoos. The results showed more subjects in the additional information group responded they would not get a tattoo, supporting the hypothesis that additional information can create response bias. Larger sample sizes are recommended for future studies.
Ever wonder how to take your search efforts on LinkedIn Recruiter to the next level? Want to learn how to be even more efficient with your searching? Explore 7 habits of top LinkedIn Recruiter users that help them uncover the best prospective candidates, even while they sleep!
“Singing in the rain”: The effect of perspective taking on music preferences ...Colleen Pacanowski
This empirical paper was presented in partial fulfillment of the fequirements for graduation with research distinction in Psychology in the undergraduate colleges of The Ohio State University.
This research examines the relationship between the first-person (1P) and third-person (3P) perspective and subsequent music selections when considering a sad scenario. 195 undergraduates at the Ohio State University read a sad scenario involving either a funeral or a sad movie from the 1P or 3P perspective, and then rated preferences for 16 genres of music. I predicted that the 3P perspective would result in little variance in rated music preferences, reflecting an implicit theory about the type of music sad people in general would prefer. In contrast, the music preferences in the 1P perspective should vary more, based on both the specific sad scenario presented (funeral or sad movie) and each participant’s individual music preferences. As predicted, 3P preferences were stronger and showed less variance than 1P preferences, supporting our belief that people have implicit theories about responding to sadness. Participants did not, however, differentiate between types of sad scenarios in their music choices. Results for several specific genres of interest are also reported. Finally, theoretical implications and future directions are discussed.
Ever wonder how to take your search efforts on LinkedIn Recruiter to the next level? Want to learn how to be even more efficient with your searching? Explore 7 habits of top LinkedIn Recruiter users that help them uncover the best prospective candidates, even while they sleep!
“Singing in the rain”: The effect of perspective taking on music preferences ...Colleen Pacanowski
This empirical paper was presented in partial fulfillment of the fequirements for graduation with research distinction in Psychology in the undergraduate colleges of The Ohio State University.
This research examines the relationship between the first-person (1P) and third-person (3P) perspective and subsequent music selections when considering a sad scenario. 195 undergraduates at the Ohio State University read a sad scenario involving either a funeral or a sad movie from the 1P or 3P perspective, and then rated preferences for 16 genres of music. I predicted that the 3P perspective would result in little variance in rated music preferences, reflecting an implicit theory about the type of music sad people in general would prefer. In contrast, the music preferences in the 1P perspective should vary more, based on both the specific sad scenario presented (funeral or sad movie) and each participant’s individual music preferences. As predicted, 3P preferences were stronger and showed less variance than 1P preferences, supporting our belief that people have implicit theories about responding to sadness. Participants did not, however, differentiate between types of sad scenarios in their music choices. Results for several specific genres of interest are also reported. Finally, theoretical implications and future directions are discussed.
Motivation in the workplace – Equity TheoryPrepared by Group.docxgilpinleeanna
Motivation in the workplace – Equity Theory
Prepared by Group 3: Kip Walker, Kyle Gummere, Sean Hall
Agenda
Equity Theory
Interview Questions
Interview Answers
Results of the Data
Supportive Answers
Divergent Answers
Conclusion and Recommendations
Reference
Appendix
2
Equity Theory
Equity Theory: What motivates people to work?
Developed in 1960’s by John S. Adams
Focus: Input and outcome
Employees compare their job’s inputs with an outcome ratio
Inequality causes employees to act to correct inequality
Human motivation of fairness between inputs and outputs
Developed by John Adams in the 1960s to explain the main motivation factor for employees. Equity Theory Hinges on what input an employee gives vs what they receive as an output (Guerrero, Anderson, Walid, 263). According to the Hashemite University employees compare their input to an output ratio. These inputs can include education, intelligence, experience training, skills, seniority, age, time background etc. and outputs include pay, intrinsic rewards supervisor satisfaction, benefits job status etc. (Al-Zawahreh, Al-Madi 158-170). As long as the inputs and outputs stay in balance in the mind of the employee the employee stays motivated. When there is an imbalance the theory states that the employee will attempt to re-create balance. When an imbalance exists will seek to reduce it by distorting inputs and/or outcomes in their own minds (“cognitive distortion”), directly altering inputs and or outcomes, or leaving the organization (Carrell, Dittrich 202-210).
3
Interview Questions
Synopsis: Utilize survey questions to draw conclusions and evaluate the validity of Equity Theory
Survey Questions:
Question 1: Have you ever experienced a situation in the work place where you felt that you were being treated unfairly compared to a coworker? In the situation, how did you react? Did your work ethic or output suffer?
Question 2: What do you consider to be the number one factor that motivates you in your current position?
Question 3: If you received a pay cut, and your coworkers did not, how would this effect your output?
Question 4: If I were to increase your salary by 150%, do you believe that you would be 150% more productive?
Question 5: Do you agree with the statement that the individuals who get paid more than you are more productive and contribute more to the company than you do? Why or why not?
The synopsis for our research project is as follows: Question 1 was designed to test if people have felt an imbalance in the workplace which correlates directly to the equity theory.
Question 2 was designed to ascertain which outputs (factor) is the most important to the individual (intrinsic vs extrinsic motivators).
Question 3 was meant to determine what action an individual would be willing to take if the perceived imbalance was deemed too great.
Question 4 examines the opposite reaction once might take. Finally,
question 5 is meant to determine whether there is a ...
2. INTRODUCTION
We are investigating whether providing additional information
creates a response bias. We choose this question because we
wanted to find out how extra information in the question will
af fect our subjects’ answers.
We are asking a control question, and also a question that
includes false additional information:
Would you consider getting a large visible tattoo? (control)
Studies have shown that people with many tattoos are 65% less likely to
be hired for a job. Would you consider getting a large visible tattoo?
3. HYPOTHESIS
if a student is given the question with additional
information, then s/he will be more likely to give us the
biased answer. That is, when we include the “negative”
information about tattoos and how they af fect the working
force, and then ask afterwards whether the individual would
consider getting a tattoo, we should expect that the response
will also be biased in that manner, resulting in a “negative”
answer, like no.
4. METHODS
We obtained our subjects in a non -biased manner by randomly
selecting 50 students out of all and only 12 th grade students at
Tucson High School. Unfortunately, our randomization is limited
due to the fact the senior class of approximately 600 students is
much too large to actually be put and drawn from a hat.
We asked the first random 25 individuals the controlled question
during lunch and recorded results. Then we asked the following
25 individuals the question with additional information during
the same lunch and recorded the results.
We will incorporate good principles for this survey by being
familiar with our question, knowing what our objectives are, and
how much information we need. This will give us accuracy and
relevancy. Only asking the senior class composed of almost 18 or
18 year olds will eliminate the variable of a student being too
young. Other variables to be avoided will be stereotypes and
gender association eliminated by randomization.
6. DISCUSSIONS & CONCLUSIONS
We can see that asking our question with additional
information creates a response bias. By asking this question
we found that people are more inclined to say no because of
the negative information added.
Next time we would ask a lot more individuals instead of
5o, we would ask around 150-200. This would help us insure
that the trend we see here is true.