Instructions: Using the study below and your skills working with SPSS, answer the questions

following questions. Use the SPSS provided data sets. IMPORTANT: Answer options may be in

a different order, so make sure to choose carefully!

Part One

(Use the SPSS

DataAnalysisFIU#1CommitmentSpring.sav

data set for this section).

Study: Research shows that it is harder for someone to admit their decision was wrong when they

publically commit to that decision. For example, think about an umpire or referee, who might

respond aggressively when their public decision is challenged (even if they are wrong).

Imagine we conduct an Asch-type line study where we give participants a standard line and ask

them to choose which of three comparison lines it matches in terms of length. We then alter the

type of commitment that participants must make: One group of participants merely thinks about

which of the three comparison lines matches the standard line (Private Commitment: Think).

One group writes down their answer and then immediately erases it (Private Commitment: Write

and Erase). A final group writes down their answer and then turns the answer over to the

experimenters (Public Commitment: Write and Hand Over). All participants are then told that

other participants in the study (actually confederates) had chosen a different line. The researcher

then asks them if they would like to change their original line choice (keep or revise) as well as

how confident they are in their original line choice (1 = not at all confident to 9 = extremely

confident). Using this study design, answer the following four questions:

1). What is the independent variable in this study, and how many levels are there to each?

Choose the correct response (

.5 points

)

A. IV: Line Choice Change, with two levels (keep or revise)

B. IV: Line Choice Confidence, with nine levels (1 = not at all confident through 9 =

extremely confident)

C. IV: Commitment, with three levels (Private Commitment: Think versus Private

Commitment: Erase versus Public Commitment: Write and Hand Over).

D. IV: Original Line Choice, with two levels (Line One, Line Two, or Line Three)

2). What is/are the dependent variable(s) in this study, and what scale of measurement are they

based on (NOIR)? (

.5 points

)

A. DV #1: Line Choice Change: Interval scale. DV #2: Line Choice Confidence:

Nominal scale

B. DV #1: Line Choice Change: Nominal scale DV #2: Line Choice Confidence:

Interval scale

C. DV #1: Original Line Choice: Nominal scale. DV #2: Line Choice Confidence: Ratio

scale

D. DV #1: Commitment: Interval scale. DV #2: Original Line Choice: Nominal scale

3). We are going to run some analyses on the data. Across all the independent variable, you think

that participants will be more likely to revise their original line choice in the two private

commitment conditions (Think and Erase) than in the public commitment condition. Using the

SPSS data file, run this analysis. Make sure to use the correct statistical test! Choose the correct

analysis, write-up, and conclusion from the options below (

1.5 points

)

A. We ran a chi square using condition as the independent variable (Private Think versus

Private Erase versus Public) and whether participants chose to keep versus revise their

original line choice as the dependent variable. A significant effect emerged,

2

(2) = 17.14,

p

< .001. Participants more participants chose to keep their original line choice in the

public commitment condition (70%) than in the private think condition (10%) and private

erase condition (25%). This indicates that participants were less likely to change their

opinion after making a public commitment.

B. We ran a chi square using condition as the independent variable (Private Think versus

Private Erase versus Public) and whether participants chose to keep versus revise their

original line choice as the dependent variable. A significant effect emerged,

2

(60) = .54,

p

< .001. Participants more participants chose to keep their original line choice in the

public commitment condition (70%) than in the private think condition (10%) and private

erase condition (25%). This indicates that participants were less likely to change their

opinion after making a public commitment.

C. We ran a chi square using condition as the independent variable (Private Think versus

Private Erase versus Public) and whether participants chose to keep versus revise their

original line choice as the dependent variable. A significant effect did not emerge,

2

(2) =

17.14,

p

> .05. Participants were equally likely to change their original line choice in the

private think condition, private erase condition, and public condition (90%, 75%, and

70%, respectively). This indicates that participants were not impacted by the confederates

choosing a different line.

D. We ran a One Way ANOVA using condition as the independent variable (Private

Think versus Private Erase versus Public) and whether participants chose to keep versus

revise their original line choice as the dependent variable. A significant effect emerged,

F

(2, 57) = 11.40,

p

< .001. Tukey post hoc tests showed that participants were more likely

to revise their opinion in the public commitment condition (

M

= 1.30,

SD

= 0.31) than in

both the private commitment think condition (

M

= 1.75,

SD

= 0.44) and the private

commitment erase condition (

M

= 1.90,

SD

= 0.47). This indicates that participants were

less likely to change their opinion after making a public commitment.

4). For your main analysis, you predict that if participants make a public commitment to their

original line choice, they will be more confident in their choice even after being told that other

participants chose a different line than participants who make either a private think

commitment or a private erase commitment, though the two private commitment conditions

will not differ from each other. Choose the correct analysis, write-up, and conclusion from the

options below (

1.5 points

)

A. We ran an independent samples

t

-Test using commitment condition as the independent

variable (Private Think versus Private Erase versus Public) and participant confidence in

their original line choice as the dependent variable. A significant effect did not emerge,

t

(38) = 1.26,

p

> .05. Participants were equally confident in their original line choice in

both the public commitment condition (

M

= 5.10,

SD

= 1.74) and the private commitment

erase condition (

M

= 4.55,

SD

= 0.89). This indicates that the dissenting opinion of other

participants (confederates) did not appear to impact the confidence level of participants.

B. We ran a One Way ANOVA using commitment condition as the independent variable

(Private Think versus Private Erase versus Public) and participant confidence in their

original line choice as the dependent variable. A significant effect emerged,

F

(2, 57) =

2.70,

p

< .05. Tukey post hoc tests showed that participants were more likely to revise

their opinion in the public commitment condition (

M

= 5.10,

SD

= 1.74) than in both the

private commitment think condition (

M

= 4.20,

SD

= 0.83) and the private commitment

erase condition (

M

= 4.55,

SD

= 0.89). This indicates that participants were less likely to

change their opinion after making a public commitment.

C. We ran a One Way ANOVA using commitment condition as the independent variable

(Private Think versus Private Erase versus Public) and participant confidence in their

original line choice as the dependent variable. A significant effect did not emerge,

F

(2, 57)

= 2.73,

p

> .05. Confidence levels did not differ between the private commitment erase

condition (

M

= 5.10,

SD

= 1.74), the public condition (

M

= 4.20,

SD

= 0.83), and the

private commitment think condition (

M

= 4.55,

SD

= 0.89). This indicates that the

dissenting opinion of other participants (confederates) did not appear to impact the

confidence level of participants.

D. We ran a One Way ANOVA using commitment condition as the independent variable

(Private Think versus Private Erase versus Public) and participant confidence in their

original line choice as the dependent variable. A significant effect did not emerge,

F

(2, 57)

= 2.73,

p

> .05. Confidence levels did not differ between the public commitment condition

(

M

= 5.10,

SD

= 1.74), the private commitment think condition (

M

= 4.20,

SD

= 0.83), and

the private commitment erase condition (

M

= 4.55,

SD

= 0.89). This indicates that the

dissenting opinion of other participants (confederates) did not appear to impact the

confidence level of participants.

Part Two

(Use the SPSS

DataAnalysisFIU#2CommitmentSpring.sav

data set for this section).

Imagine we alter the design a bit. First, we focus only on the public commitment and the private

commitment think conditions. Second, we tell them that the other participants are either

Freshmen college students or faculty members (with the latter most likely having more

credibility in their line decision-making ability!). The dependent variables remain the same.

Using this new design, answer the following questions.

5). What is/are the independent variable(s) in this study, and how many levels are there to each?

(

.5 points

)

A. IV #1: Commitment, two levels (Public versus Private Erase Commitment) IV #2:

Confederate (Freshmen versus Faculty)

B. IV #1: Commitment, two levels (Public versus Private Think Commitment) IV #2:

Confederate (Freshmen versus Faculty)

C. IV #1: Commitment, three levels (Public versus Private Think versus Private Erase

Commitment) IV #2: Confederate (Freshmen versus Faculty)

D. IV #1: Line Choice Change, two levels (Keep versus Revise) IV #2: Confederate

(Freshmen versus Faculty)

6). Consider all of the possible main effects and interactions for this study. Run a 2 X 2 ANOVA

(I will let YOU figure out which dependent variable to use for this!). Choose the option below

that best describes the outcome. (

.5 points

)

A. There are two significant main effects and a significant interaction

B. There is one significant main effect, one non-significant main effect, and a significant

interaction

C. There are no significant main effects but there is a significant interaction

D. There are two significant main effects but no significant interaction