Follow the instructions..
Independent Variable: Gender
Dependent Variable: Their behavior was acceptable and Their behavior was immoral.
a. Materials and Procedure
i. For this section, things are again very flexible. Some studies include the Materials and Procedure in the same section while others break them up into two sections
1. It is a matter of choice which you choose. For me, the more complex the design, the better it is to split them up. In one section I will describe what the materials are; in the next I describe what participants did with those materials (the procedure)
2. Your Paper IV: Study Two Methods, Results, and Discussion is simple enough that I recommend combining them into one overall Materials and Procedure section. Here, you can refer back to your methods section from Paper II. (“We used the same Facebook Consensus manipulation as in study one, but here we included only the Support and Mixed conditions”).
ii. Again, the words Materials and Procedure is flush left. In this section …
1. Provide information about your materials and your procedure.
a. I suggest starting with your procedure. Tell your reader what your participants did in the order participants did them. Be specific. Assuming your study is similar to study one, I have the following recommendations (though your study may differ, so take these only as recommendations!):
i. First, talk about informed consent.
ii. Second, talk about the different versions of the hindsight bias studies. Provide enough detail so that your readers know how the conditions differ. Imagine I need to replicate your design – give me enough detail so I can do so. Also fully describe your new independent variable for study two. For example, my additional IV may be whether participants are forewarned or not about the effects of consensus. I need to fully describe that new IV in the methods for this second study
1. For example, study two MIGHT look support versus mixed conditions as two levels of one IV. However, we might also look at forewarning versus no forewarning as a second IV. This involves four cells: 1) Forewarning with support feedback, 2) Forewarning with mixed feedback, 3) No forewarning with support feedback, and 4) No forewarning with mixed feedback.
2. Make sure you have a clear idea about what your four different conditions look like.
iii. Third, talk about your dependent variables (that is, your survey questions. For these DVs, once again provide enough detail so I know exactly what questions you asked. For example, “Participants provided their gender, age, and race”. For other dependent variables, tell me how the responses were recorded (yes/no, true/false, a scale of 1 to 9, etc.). If you used a scale, note the endpoints. That is, does a 1 mean it is high or is it low? “Participants were asked, ‘How surprising was the outcome?’, and they responded on a scale from 1 (unsurprising) to 10 (surprising).’” Highlight any new DVs you created for this study. For example, I may ask a manipulation check question asking if they were forewarned (“Did you read a warning that consensus impacts how people make judgments? Yes / No – Pick one.”)
iv. Fourth, make sure to highlight which DVs you analyzed. If there are DVs participants completed but you did not analyze them, feel free to say those DVs were not analyzed.
v. Finally, mention debriefing
b. There is no set minimum or maximum on the length of the methods section, but I would expect at least a page or two as you detail your materials and procedure. Missing important aspects of your IVs and DVs or presenting them in a confused manner will lower your score in this section
c. Once again, make the new information VERY specific so that someone unfamiliar with your study could recreate your survey. If they can’t, you won’t do well!
CONFORMITY AND PEER EFFECTS ON FACEBOOK
Consensus: Conformity and Peer Effects on Facebook
Maria C Daza
With the use of social network services like Facebook, people have the possibility to post status updates for their peers to read. In turn, peers respond to this comment with their thoughts and opinions. Making use of a survey several studies were run looking at how participants respond to a cheating scenario by showing two different gender (Abigail/Adam) Facebook page that contains the user’s confession to cheating in an exam followed by different feedback comments from their peers. We distinguish between three diﬀerent treatment conditions: opposed feedback, supported feedback and mixed feedback. Whereas the ﬁrst condition
a). your research questions,
b). your participants, study one 140, study two 200
c). your experimental methodology,
d). your findings,
and e). your conclusions.
Keywords: consensus, gender, conformity, Facebook feedback, peers, unanimity
Consensus: Conformity and Peer Effects on Facebook
Social media refers to websites and applications that are designed to allow people to share content quickly, efficiently, and in real-time (Hudson, 2019). Social sharing refers to the act of spreading content on a social media platform to one’s peers, groups, or chosen individuals. To share photos, opinions and events for our family and peers to read has changed the way we live now a days. All this technology has made it easier for anyone to create a profile and post their opinion in any social media for our friends or anyone who feels related to comment, like or shared their opinion. Social media usage is one of the most popular online activities and in 2019, 79 percent of the population in the United States had a social networking profile, representing a two percent increase from the 77 percent usage reach in the previous year. This equals approximately 247 million U.S. social media users as of 2019 (Clement, 2019). Most people share their personal experiences, feelings and thoughts, but at the same time your exposed for a controversial respond. The good things about social media is that you also have the ability to choose who to share your opinion. The most famous social medias are Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and YouTube. In each of these social medias mentioned before you can post anything that you want and get a reply back by who you choose to share it with. Also, people can share your comments and their social media family and peers can read it and comment on it. Some of your posts might go viral and there might be a negative, positive or mixed effect related to your post.
Facebook is one of the most famous social media worldwide. That was one of my first social media back in 2006, I was 16 years old. I remember it was a new way to communicate with our friends and family. It was very easy; we will comment on each other walls and get replies back from friends. Facebook has 2.45 billion monthly active users (Facebook, 2019). If that number doesn’t blow you away, it also has 1.62 billion users that are visiting the social networking site on a daily basis (Mohsin, et al., 2020). Facebook is also the owner of other leading social medias such as WhatsApp, Instagram and Messenger. Facebook also has its negative side like creating face Facebook profiles and cyberbullying others, sexual harassment, fraud and much more. We need to be careful who we accept as friends and that content that we share because 60 percent of 50 to 60-year old are active on social media and 18-29- year-olds have an 89% usage (Mohsin, et al., 2020).
Conformity can be as a change in behavior, internal views or attitudes caused by social influence and group pressures (Hogg and Vaughan, 2014). Pressures to conform arise from social norms, which reflect the values or desired circumstances of a wider, social group (Smith, Mackie & Claypool, 2014). Achieving social norms of a group, individuals can conform in one of two, primary ways: by compliance or internalization. Compliance is where an individual conforms to a majority despite no internal change in belief, meaning the change is temporary and exists for the benefit of a social group (Hogg and Vaughan, 2014). As a result, when an individual is not being observed or surveyed by the group in question, their behaviors may revert to reflect themselves more accurately. However, internalization is where an individual conforms to a social norm, but experiences an additional, internal change in their attitudes and actions, meaning the desired behavior exists regardless of the presence of a majority (Hogg and Vaughan, 2014).
The study also analyzes that students who cheat on their exams risk more than their grades. According to Rettinger and other researchers, students who cheat can still see themselves as principled people by rationalizing cheating for reasons they see as legitimate (Simmons, 2018). 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 unanimously oppositional feedback, with those who read mixed feedback falling between these extremes. (NEEDS MORE WORK)
Methods Study One
There were one hundred and forty students from Florida International University, whom were randomly selected for this study. In this study sample, 73, 52.1% were female (N = 2), and 62, 44.3% were female (N = 1), while 5 participants (mixed gender: male and female) 3.6%. The participants’ age ranged 17 to 45 (M = 23.08, SD = 4.91). Our sample population consisted of 25.7% Caucasian (N= 36), 40.0% Hispanic (N=56), 2.1% Native Indian (N= 3), 17.1% African American (N= 24), 6.4% Asian American (N=9) and 8.6% who did not specify their identity (N=12). See Appendix A.
Materials and Procedure
Since this study was adherent to the principles of informed consent, all the participating students were informed about the risks associated with handling the involved materials. As such, the research materials containing the questionnaires were presented to them and the benefits of the study explained…