psych and education midterm #2

When African American students received an intervention that encouraged them to believe social adversity

All of the above

The article you read about social belonging

Described an intervention study

What happened in Lin-siegler et. At. Study when students were told of scientists struggles

None of the above

Belonging uncertainty

May be felt most acutely when people enter settings in which their social group is negatively stereotyped or underrepresented

Procedure for social belonging

Random assignment to 1 hour session, read narrative (social adversity is common and temporary) and write essay about your experience and record it on camera

• control is same process but not about belongingness and students not experience anything

Key to the intervention in social belonging

People’s subjective interpretations of the quality of their relationships, more so than the objective number of attributes of those relationships, strongly affects well-being. So this intervention helped encourage non threatening interpretations

Virtuous cycle

Because something good happened, something else good happens

DV’s of social belonging

Daily surveys to assess psychological responses to adversity. And end of college survey of sense of belong, health, and well being. Finally gpa

Results for social belonging

Control group: feelings role and fell with adversity

Treatment group: sense of belonging is untethered, aka unrelated to daily hardship, higher gpa, tripled people in 25% of class, greater stability and less uncertainty, less doctor visits, higher subjective happiness, and don’t think interventions had effect

Why should we care about social belonging

Inequality stems a bit from social belonging concerns, these intervention can improve academic performance

• we also help by interpreting meaning of adversity

Goal of study for struggling scientists

To teach growth mindset, compare effect of intellectual and life struggles, students motivation, and students with difference performance

Struggling scientists study procedure

Read 3 stories about scientists either struggled intellectually, struggled in personal life or made great discovery (control)

• dv: look at grades, feelings of connectedness and motivation/goal in future.

Struggling scientists results

Motivation: no effect

Grades: intellectual or personal struggles lead to higher post test scores

Feeling of connection: both struggle stories made students feel more connection

Struggling scientists why should we care?

Myth that scientists don’t struggle, might be preventing subjects from doing well in science and pursuing it further, hiding struggles might have adversities effect on others

What did the authors hypothesize for stereotype threat?

Stereotype threat places an extra burden on cognitive resources

How did authors of stereotype threat test working memory capacity?

Participants completed 2 tasks at the same time

The stereotype threat article reports on a mediation analysis what did it find?

Reduction in working memory mediates of the effect of stereotype threat on performance

Stereotype threat

Risk of conforming negative stereotype ofc ones race, ethnicity or gender

Working memory capacity

Memory for temporary activated information of interest thats relevant to task

Testing working memory for stereotype threat

Processing task and memory span task

• like math then recalled word

Hypothesis for stereotype threat

Other studies has focused on affective response while this study focuses on cognitive responses

Experiment 1 procedures in stereotype threat

31 male, 28 female, “do you think there is stereotype of women having less mathematical ability than men”

Random assignment

• control: reliable measure of working memory

• Stereotype threat: measure of quantitative captivity, and told gender diff might relate to diff in quantitative capacity

• Dv: # of words recalled and self report measure of anxiety, perceived difficulty

Experiment 1 stereotype threat interactions result

Statistic equivalent when stereotype threat wasn’t present. Women in stereotype threat condition recalled fewer words than men in stereotype threat, no diff in anxiety, women rated higher in perceived difficulty when stereotype threat was there

Experiment two for stereotype threat procedure

Same as study 1 expect for manipulation and also with Latinos

• told test was performance on intelligence and ask what is their ethnicity before

Experiment two for stereotype threat results

Latinx students in stereotype threat condition recalled fewer words than whites, other measures where n.s.

• Latinx students in threat reported more anxiety compared to Latinx in control

• Latinx rated test more difficult than whites

Experiment 3 procedure for stereotype threat

Female 31 undergrad, completed tasks in groups of 3, randomly assigned to conditions, task was counting vowels and recall words then math test

• control: groups and experimenter was female and told it was problem solving process

• Threat: female with male confederates and experimenter was male and told it was math aptitude and asked to indicate gender

• Dv: # of words recalled and math test performance

Experiment 3 results for stereotype threat

Stereotype threat condition recalled less words than control, and less accurate

on math test

Mediational analysis

Stereotype threat —> working memory ——> math test performance

Why should we care about stereotype threat?

Cognitive deficits associated with stereotype threat, we care about performance, we should not cause distress to someone who can perform bad

How did learning from the internet affect participants confidence in what they learned and perfections for quiz performance

Students were overconfident in their knowledge when they’d learned form an internet search

Relevant past research for internet search

External sources reliance hinders storage of that info in internal memory, inflate retrieval with their own memory capabilities

Hypothesis for internet search

People don’t know of internet induced learning, online reduces storage of new info

Experiment 1 procedures for internet search

199, they had to learn something and be quizzed

Random assigned to one topic: inflation, photosynthesis, and autism

• Internet search: were told to search a topic, and open tap and search

• No internet search: identical website, text was right there

Learning phase

• provided with 3 sources for their topic, study as long as they liked incentivized with bonus pay

DV: prediction of quiz performance, and quiz performance

Experiment 1 results for internet search

Participants in internet predicted that they would preform better than no search and they performed lower. They spent less time in leaning phase aka more overconfident

Question for experiment #3a & 3B in internet search

Did the internet group only perform less due to study time

Experiment 2 question for internet search

We’re the task to dissimilar?

Experiment 2 procedures for internet search

196, replication of experiment 1 but no internet search condition was assigned distractor task

• DV: confidence and performance

Experiment 2 results for internet search

Confidence was equal in both groups, but performance was worse for internet search. Also internet search spent less on learning phase

Experiment 3a procedures for internet search

200, same as experiment 2 but learning couldn’t continue until timer expired

• DV: confidence and quiz performance

Experiment 3a results for internet search

Confidence was equal but internet search performance was worse

Experiment 3b procedures for internet search

Kinda like experiment 2 but people had to reflect

Experiment 3b results for internet search

Same time in learning phase, but internet search were more confident and less correct answers

Experiment 4 research question for internet search

What drives effect we seen?

Experiment 4 percedures for internet search

401 participants, 2 conditions: internet search and link (provided topic and link to content they were learn)

• no search for link, same material, only access them differently

Experiment 4 results for internet search

Same prediction, but internet search was performing worse.

• discussion says that internet search makes us encodes the search not the information

Counter factual thinking

Counter to facts, contrary to real

First instinct fallacy

Action —> event is more earlier to imagine and generates stronger affect than inaction —> event

Overview for experiment 1 on first instinct

Compared anticipated and actual outcome of sticking versus switching

Overview for experiment 2 on first instinct

Examined whether switching from correct to incorrect is more irksome than is failing to switch from incorrect to correct

Overview for experiment 3 on first instinct

Examined whether sticking is remembered as being a better strategy than it in fact is

Overview for experiment 4 on first instinct

Tested whether a belief in the first instinct fallacy is impacted by frustration and a memory bias

Study 1 The eraser study methods

About 1.5 k students and they looked at scantrons to see eraser marks. Saw wrong → right, right → wrong, and wrong → wrong

• also measured predicted performance

The erasure study results

About 3.2k changed answers

• 51% of wrong answered were changed to right, it was predicated to be 33%. Underestimated

• 25% of right answered were changed to wrong, it was predicted to be 42%. Overestimated

• 79% changed answeres

  • 54% were helped and 19% were hurt

The erasers study limitations and RQ for study should I stay or should I go?

Erased answers aren’t necessarily first instincts.

is correct → incorrect more regrettable than failing to switch from incorrect → correct

Should I stay or should I go method

Scenario based

• told that they were doing an exam and they did two options A: they got the right answer but switch it to a wrong answer and B: they got the wrong answer but never switch it to the right answer

• Asked which one made them feel foolish? More regrettable? And should have known better?

Should I stay or should I go? Results

Switching when I should have stuck had the most negative affect.

• 74% regret, 61% foolish, 45% should have known better

The standardized test research questions

Difference in regret —> different in memory

• prediction: they would see sticking better than it was and switching worse than it was due to regret

The standardized test method

Did 30 min of SAT, if they were stuck on an answer they were told to narrow it down to 2 and pick 1 choice

• estimated # they got right and wrong when switching and # they got right and wrong when sticking

The standardized test results

Main effects: stuck with 1st answer more and got problem wrong more than right

Interaction: participants more likely to get answer wrong if they stick with first instincts

Participants remember switching and got it wrong more than switching and getting it right

Who wants to be a millionaire research question

Regret/frustration —> heightened memory

Who wants to be a millionaire research method

68 UG, kinda simulated who wants to be a millionaire

• questions, 4 answers, 2 of remaining 4 eliminated by lifeline, contestant left to choose form 2 option they could either switch or stick

• That’s our teammate, they either had to always stick or always switch, in both condition they were correct half of the time

• DV: record outcome of question and level of frustration, indicate extent to which strategy helped or hut and evaluate strategy

Who wants to be a millionaire results

Participants who switch and got it wrong lead teammates to be more frustrated, and believed that better luck when sticking to answer, more critical when teammate switch when they should have stuck when vice versa

Causal model for who wants to be a millionaire

Switching —> frustration —→ memory bias —→ fallacy

Why should we care about first instincts

Test takers should be warned that sticking is ill advised, other research were instructed about the fallacy and were no more likely to change their answers

It’s possible to impact students level of math anxiety

With a brief reading on the adaptive functions of stress

The stress arousal reappraisal intervention the authors used worked what did it do?

it suggest that signs of stress can be seen as coping tools

What else did authors find in appraisal stress

All of the above