materials and procedure
Consensus & Gender, Spring 2020
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY The purpose of this study is to identify general impressions of social media users. NUMBER OF STUDY PARTICIPANTS If you decide to be in this study, you will be one of 140 people in this research study. DURATION OF THE STUDY Your participation will involve a maximum of 10 minutes to complete the questionnaire. PROCEDURES If you agree to be in the study, we will ask you to do the following: 1. Look over the Facebook profile presented. 2. Answer a few questions regarding how you feel about the profile owner as well as yourself. RISKS AND/OR DISCOMFORTS The study has the following possible risks to you: Minor discomfort with personal questions regarding how you would respond to specific scenarios in social media. BENEFITS The study has the following possible benefits to you: Your participation in the study will provide useful data for the development of the study. Accordingly, the findings of our study will contribute to the advancement of knowledge in the field of Psychology. Do you consent to participate in this research project?
Yes (1)
No (2)
Scale Without looking back, please rate your impressions of the Facebook owner's test-taking behavior below.
|
|
Strongly disagree (1) |
Disagree (2) |
Somewhat disagree (3) |
Somewhat agree (4) |
Agree (5) |
Strongly Agree (6) |
|
Their behavior was wrong |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Their behavior was understandable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Their behavior was reasonable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Their behavior was unethical |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Their behavior was immoral |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Their behavior was appropriate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Their behavior was unacceptable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Q50 Without looking back, please rate how YOU would advise the Facebook owner; rate how YOU would respond if you mistakenly received the answer key from the professor; and then generally rate the Facebook owner.
|
|
Strongly disagree (1) |
Disagree (2) |
Somewhat disagree (3) |
Somewhat agree (4) |
Agree (5) |
Strongly Agree (6) |
|
I would advise them to keep silent |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I would try to comfort them |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I would give them the same advice that their friends gave them |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If I received the answers, I would keep silent |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If I received the answers, I would confess |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Facebook owner seems warm |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Facebook owner seems good-natured |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Facebook owner seems confident |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Facebook owner seems competitive |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Facebook owner seems sincere |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Facebook owner seems moral |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Facebook owner seems competent |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Please provide the following demographic information. Note: you can leave blank any questions you feel uncomfortable answering.
Gender What is your gender?
Male (1)
Female (2)
Other (3)
Age What is your age?
________________________________________________________________
Race What is your race/ethnicity?
Caucasian (1)
Hispanic (2)
Native Indian (3)
African American (4)
Asian American (5)
Others--Please specify (6) ________________________________________________
Language Is English your first language?
Yes (1)
No (2)
If no, specify your first language (3) ________________________________________________
FIU Are you a student at Florida International University?
Yes (1)
No (2)
What is your relationship status?
Single / No Relationship (1)
In a relationship (2)
Without looking back, what general feedback did the Facebook owner's friends give them?
The feedback supported their behavior (1)
Feedback was mixed (2)
Unknown (3)
What is the gender of the Facebook page's owner?
Female (1)
Male (2)
Unknown (3)
Thank you for participating. The purpose of this study is to determine if Facebook feedback that seems to support or oppose cheating impacts how participants perceived that cheating. That is, will Facebook feedback that appears to support (versus oppose) a friend who cheated on an exam influence how participants perceive that cheating? To study this possibility, participants all read the same cheating scenario in which a person (Abigail or Adam) cheated on an exam by using an answer key the professor mistakenly gave them. When seeking advice from their friends, the friends either gave them unanimously supportive feedback (“Wow, Abigail/Adam, sounds like you really lucked out there. Take the grade. You “earned” it!” and “Listen, it’s not like you intended to cheat going into the exam. The prof should have checked to make sure he was handing out only blank exams. His mistake – your big break! Take the grade.”), or mixed feedback, including negative feedback. The word “unanimous” is important here. When the feedback is unanimous (either in support of the user or opposing), it is harder to voice a contrary opinion. When feedback is mixed, it is easier to voice a true opinion. In general, we predict that participants who read unanimously supportive feedback will rate the Facebook user’s conduct as more acceptable than participants who read mixed feedback. More specifically, participants in the unanimously supportive condition will more strongly agree with supportive survey statements (“Abigail’s/Adam's behavior was understandable, “Abigail’s/Adam's behavior was reasonable”, “Abigail’s/Adam's behavior was appropriate”, “I would advise Abigail/Adam to keep silent”, and “I would try to comfort Abigail/Adam”) in comparison to the mixed condition. We will also investigate if these effects vary by gender. We will test these hypotheses in our methods course this semester. Thank you for participating!
Page of
Page 1 of 10