| |
 | How To Make Additional Pages |
| How to Put Graphics on Your Pages |
| How to Create a Photo Album |
|
|
Members:
CEO: members:
Add your own links here using your edit "Page". i.e. links to other related websites your members may find interesting.
ESTER BALDWIN
Ester Baldwin
Link
Link
Link
Link
Link
|
|
Welcome To An Experiemnt on Cognitive Dissonance!
ABSTRACT:
To observe cognitive dissonance in action, a field experiment was conducted to investigate cognitive dissonance via changes in moral attitudes toward cheating following temptation. Attitudes of 60 six-grade students from Bernal Intermediate School in San Jose, Ca, were measured before and after a contest that presented them with a $20.00 prize for the individual that scored the highest. This presented them with a decision to violate or comply with the moral standard against cheating. Results indicated that there was a difference in attitude change between the two experimental conditiona: (a) low restraint (given a chance to cheat) and (b) high restraint (not given the chance to cheat). Individuals who chose not to cheat (25%) adopted a harsher attitude toward cheating. Individuals who opted to cheat (75%) adopted a more lenient attitude toward cheating. The experiment consisted of (a) one condition in which participants were given the opportunity to cheat (low restraint) by allowing them to grade their own sheets after introducing temptation of a $20.00 prize for the individual who got the most right and (b) one condition in which the participants were not given the opportunity to cheat (high restraint) after introducing temptation of a $20.00 prize for the individual who got the most right. A short pre-experimental and post-experimental questionnaire measured the participants' change in attitude toward the immoral act of cheating.
Participants This study had a convenience sample 60 (31 female and 29 male) guidance students with an age range of 12 to 13 years at Bernal Intermediate School in San Jose. The 60 participants belonged to 3 classes total. Two classes were assigned to the low restraint experimental condition and one was assigned to the low restraint experimental condition. Of the 64 participants initially recruited, four were not included in the experiment due to attrition. They were not present on the day of the experiment
Design and method of assignments of subjects This study conducted a between-subjects design with a convenience sample. Students from three classes were asked to volunteer in this experiment. The experiment was a nonequivalent single factor design with 2 levels of the independent variable. The present study had one independent variable manipulated, which was restraint with two experimental conditions. The present study introduced two classes (44 participants: 22 female and 22 male) with a high motivation ($20.00 prize) and low restraint (easy to cheat) and one class (16 participants:9 female and 7 male) with a high motivation ($20.00) and high restraint (not given the opportunity top cheat). Because this was a nonequivalent design existing subject characteristics were present.
This experiment used two "Dot Tests" contest sheets, a writing utensil, two attitude questionnaires for each participant and a prize for entire class (in this case, a pizza party) and a timer. Each of the three classes was tested separately in a classroom environment at Bernal Intermediate School.
METHODS-PROCEDURE
1. Consent Form
Prior to the experiment every student in the classes (76 students total) were given the consent forms. Participants were given a consent form to sign (see Appendix A for complete form) as well as their parent (s) (see Appendix B for complete form). Upon signing the consent form participants agreed to volunteer in the study. The consent form gave a brief description about the general purpose of the research study, a brief description of the procedure and the amount of time the experiment would take. The teacher of the class distributed and collected the consent forms from the students.
2.The Attitude Questionnaire (Pre-Test)
After the consent form had been signed, the teacher had the participants fill out an attitude questionnaire six days prior to the experiment for the low restraint group. This was used as a moral standard toward cheating. The teacher did not mention any relationship between the questionnaire and the enumeration experiment. The attitude questionnaire consisted of 15 situations. Ten situations were pertinent to cheating and five referring to aggressive or disobedient acts, which did not refer to cheating and were therefore eliminated. The participants were asked to indicate the degree of punishment that should be given to each situation on a five-point scale with corresponding degrees of punishment. The range will be as illustrated below( see Appendix C for full context of the questionnaire):
Degree of Punishment (1-5 scale) Punishment
1 Should not be punished at all
2 Should serve detention
3 Parents should be contacted
4 Should be sent to the Principal's office
5 Should be suspended
The instructions of the questionnaire were read aloud by the teacher and subjects were asked to indicate their date of birth only to remain somewhat anonymous to the teacher. On completion of the questionnaire the participants turned it in.
3. Extending Appreciation
Six days after the pre-test attitude questionnaire had been completed the actual experiment took place. Participants were immensely thanked for being part of the experiment.
4."Dot-Counting " Contest
After extending appreciation the participants from both groups were introduced to the "Dot-Counting" Contest (see Appendix D). The experimenter told the subjects,
"This experiment is being conducted to help me learn more about visual enumeration 'the ability to count things quickly and accurately'."
The importance of the experiment was stressed. After each student received a "Dot-Counting" sheet faced down, the instructions were read aloud by the experimenter:
"Please do not turn the paper face up until instructed to do so. Please print your name in the indicated box as well as your date of birth. There will be several boxes with dots inside them labeled A to L. Your task will be to count the number of dots in each square. Write down the number of dots you get for each square next to that square. You will have two minutes. Start with square A and try to count the dots in as many squares as you can. Your score will be the number of squares you counted correctly. If the number that you write down next to the square is not the exact number it will be marked wrong. When instructed to stop counting, please put your pens down."
Both groups were given the test after being instructed. Both groups immediately turned in their task sheets after the two minutes were up. A second test was performed. Participants were told:
"Thank you for your participation, but I need one more test to compare your results to a re-test to see if you improve. This is a different test than the first. Your task is the same as before and again you will be given two minutes again. In order to make this more interesting and worth while, the individual who scores the best from the two tests will receive a $20.00 cash prize." (see Appendix E)
ĖGROUP ONE: High motivation, high restraint (not given a chance to cheat)
The participants in the high restraint group immediately turned in their task sheets upon completion of the two minutes.
ĖGROUP TWO: High motivation, low restraint (given a chance to cheat)
The participants in the low restraint group were told that time was short and help was needed in grading the tests. Participants were then asked to grade their own tests. Wrong answers were read aloud and participants perceived them to be the right answers. They were given the opportunity cheat by giving them the opportunity to change their answers.
5. Closing Statement
At the end of the experiment, participants were again thanked and told by the experimenter,
"While taking this second test I looked at the result of your first test and was not able to decide on just one individual. I have decided to instead reward all of you for your participation with a pizza party at lunch time."
The students were stamped on their hand with a University of the Pacific tiger as a ticket into the pizza party at lunchtime.
6. Attitude Questionnaire (Post-Test)
The teacher asked the participants to fill out the attitude questionnaire again fifteen minutes after the dot test with the justification that the tests were lost or misplaced. This test established attitude change toward cheating by comparing it to the pre-attitude questionnaire.
7. Debriefing
At lunchtime a debriefing was held to reveal the true purpose of the experiment. The participants were able to ask any questions they had and were once again thanked for their cooperation.
