Florida International University Psychology Questions

Abstract Assignment Grading Rubric (40 points possible)Title Page – 1 Point (Must have PERFECT APA formatting!)
Part One – Submit answers to questions posted on Canvas (16 points total).
Part Two – Abstract (2 points each item, or 16 points total)
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
Include the word “Abstract” at the top of your abstract
Identify the general problem or research question (the hypotheses) for both
studies.
Note the participants for both studies
Note the IVs and DVs for the studies
Note the findings for both studies
Note the overall conclusions / implications of the two studies—what does it
all mean? What are the main “take away” points from the study?
Please include keywords for the study (at least 5 keywords or phrases – these
are not included in the total word count)
Correct any errors you find on the references page and include the corrected
references at the end of your abstract (see the example paper for how this
should look). (2 points)
Writing Quality (7 points)
1.
2.
Avoid run-on sentences, sentence fragments, spelling errors, and grammar
errors.
The writing should be PERFECT here. You will lose a point for each writing
error, so proofread, proofread, and proofread some more!
SOCIAL COMPARISON, WARNING ON SOCIAL MEDIA
Social Comparison and Warning: Impact on Social Media
First M. Last
Florida International University
1
SOCIAL COMPARISON, WARNING ON SOCIAL MEDIA
Abstract
Methods One Students: Typically, authors add their abstract for the paper here on the second
page. As you can see, the abstract for this paper is missing. Your job is to supply that abstract!
Read over the following paper, which is an actual paper turned in by a former student taking
Research Methods and Design II at FIU. This is similar to a paper you will write next semester.
Review the studies in this paper, and spot the hypotheses, independent and dependent variables,
participants, results, and implications, and write it up in one paragraph (no more than 250 words
maximum). Make sure to include keywords as well (keywords are words or short phrases that
researchers use when searching through online databases like PsycInfo – they need to be
descriptive of the paper, so come up with three or four that seem to suit this paper). Good luck!
Keywords: methods, paper, abstract, assignment, preview
2
SOCIAL COMPARISON, WARNING ON SOCIAL MEDIA
3
Social Comparison and Warning: Impact on Social Media
Social media has an impact on the way one views themselves. People tend to use an
upward and downward comparison when using social media; comparing themselves on social
media sites could influence the self-esteem to rise or become lowered depending on the image
one is focusing on. Social media has expanded throughout the years, and today plays an
important role in the lives of many who use it. Researchers have been testing the effects that
social media has on the influence of our everyday lives. For example, the study (Vries & Kuhne,
2015) tested to see if there was an indirect correlation between one’s self-image and their use of
social media platforms like Facebook, through the use of negative social comparison; in addition,
it tested if the use of Facebook and social comparison are different on the ratings of happiness on
adults. They concluded that the more time you use Facebook, the more you will have a negative
social comparison and the interaction with real life happiness; Facebook use will predict a
negative social comparison (Vries & Kuhne, 2015). In addition, this study displayed the negative
usage that social media plays on people’s emotional state.
People are constantly comparing themselves to others on social media which could
decrease or increase one’s self-esteem. If social media is displaying a person who is attractive,
has a great career, and doing better than oneself, then this could cause a decrease in their selfesteem because they appear better in their life. Evidence that tests this hypothesis (Haferkamp &
Kramer, 2011) where participants would display inferior feelings to their body image, with
people that are more beautiful on social media, than the person would have negative feelings.
The researchers result coincided with the author’s hypothesis that the participants who used
Facebook and look at good-looking users, participants would display inferior feelings to their
body image, with people that are more beautiful on social media, the person would have negative
SOCIAL COMPARISON, WARNING ON SOCIAL MEDIA
4
feelings. The researchers result coincided with the author’s hypothesis that the participants who
used Facebook and look at good-looking users, have negative emotion afterwards and don’t feel
good with their body appearance (Haferkamp & Kramer, 2011). That is, people tend to feel
worse about themselves when they start comparing their flaws to others that are more attractive.
Furthermore, an individual’s traits can play either a positive or negative emotion on their
self-worth. People already have a predisposition on what qualities are better and worse off when
comparing themselves to others. The researcher in the study (Lee, 2014) stated that comparing
yourself to an individual on social media will play a role in your self-esteem; they also tested to
see whether or not people would admit to comparing themselves to others. The researcher found
that a person’s social comparison is related to their regularity on Facebook. This was measured
by anxiety, depression, and self-concept, all of which have been been linked to a person’s
comparison usage on Facebook. Users who use Facebook constantly should be getting a lot of
attention on their posts; they expect others to like and comment more on their account (Lee,
2014). The usage of social media can have a negative effect on our self-concept; this can cause
one’s self-reflection to be affected by negative comments.
A more recent study conducted by Wang et al. (2017) found that upward social
comparison and self-esteem were correlated with the social media frequency and the
participant’s mental health. They found a positive effect of passive to upward social comparison,
this correlated with users decreased self-concept of their well-being. Social comparison can be
upward or downward, it depends on how they judge themselves compared to others (Wang et al.,
2017). Negative feelings usually arise when you engage in upward social comparison on social
media. Usage frequency may correlate mental status to decrease due to more exposure to these
posts.
SOCIAL COMPARISON, WARNING ON SOCIAL MEDIA
5
Researchers (Vogel, et al., 2014) ran a correlation analysis to figure out if the frequency
of Facebook is linked with a decrease in one’s self-esteem. They tested the impact of minimal
exposure to upward social comparison on social media sites. The results did correspond with
their hypothesis, the first one displayed the participants who used Facebook tended to have a low
self-esteem, this was a result of greater exposure to upward social comparison. This also
corresponds to the second hypothesis that stated that participants self-esteem and self-reflection
were higher when viewing a user’s profile that had a highly motivated individual with good
habits (Vogel et al., 2014).
Study one
Upward social comparison is when people compare themselves to others who are doing
better than them. On the other hand, downward comparison is when people compare themselves
to someone who is worse off than themselves. In the reoccurring evidence where social media is
playing an effect of upward and downward social comparison, poor self-esteem inflicted by this
social media usage could be contributing to our mental health; this is because comparing oneself
to others on a regular basis could be detrimental to their health. To address this question, the
independent variable is the type of social comparison elicited by a Facebook post. More
specifically, participants were randomly assigned to view one of three Facebook posts: a post
where the person is bragging about how their job interview went well (the upward comparison
group), a post where the person posts about how their job interview went poorly (the downward
group), and a post where the person describes their job interview neutrally (the neutral group).
The dependent variables explored here are participant’s ratings of their own inferiority and
confidence in their abilities after viewing the post.
SOCIAL COMPARISON, WARNING ON SOCIAL MEDIA
6
We hypothesized that participants in the upward social comparison condition will more
strongly agree with negative statements (“I feel inferior to others at this moment”) and more
strongly disagree with positive statements (“I feel confident in my abilities”) compared to
participants in the downward social comparison condition, with participants in the average social
comparison condition falling between these extremes.
Study One Method
Participants
One hundred and seventy-nine participants took part in this study. This study was made
up of 88.3% (N =158) college students that attend Florida International University and 11.7%
(N= 21) of people who do not attend Florida International University. Of these 179 participants
were 44.1% (N=79) male and 55.9%(N=100) were female. The ages varied from 17 being the
lowest and 59 being the highest age for participants. The average age is M = 24.89, SD = 7.99.
The sample sized consisted of 25.1% Caucasian (N= 45), 48.0% Hispanic (N=86), 3.4% Native
American (N= 6), 11.7% African American(N=21), 5.0% Asian American (N=9), other 6.7%
(N=12).
Materials and Procedure
The researchers asked for participants around Florida International University to
participant in the study. The participants in each study were asked for verbal consent to
participate in the study. Once the individual agreed to be a part of the study they were presented
with the risks and benefits of the study. The materials that were used for this social comparison
study was a three-page hard copy of survey questions and a pencil. The participants were
randomly assigned either one of the three Facebook pages with upward, downward or average
SOCIAL COMPARISON, WARNING ON SOCIAL MEDIA
7
social comparison. The upward Facebook profile displayed a post from Pat Masters suggesting
that they did really well on a job interview. The downward group contained a post which
suggested that the Facebook user did poorly on the job interview. The average condition
displayed a post about average performance on the interview, which falls in-between the upward
and downward conditions.
There were five parts to this study: In part one of the study, participants saw a fake
Facebook posts from a person named Pat Masters. Random assignment was used to assign
participants into three different groups upward, downward, and average social comparisons of
the Facebook profile. Parts two and three asked participants to rate their impressions of the
themselves after viewing these Facebook pages using a Likert type rating scale ranging from 1-6
with one being “strongly disagree” and six being “strongly agree”. The main dependent variables
examined in this study were their impressions of themselves after viewing the Facebook, “I feel
inferior to others at this moment” and “I feel confident about my abilities”. Part four asked
participants six questions about their demographics. Lastly, the participants were debriefed from
the study and thanked for participating.
Study One Results
A one-way ANOVA test was done to look at relationship between independent variable
upward vs downward vs average and the ratings of “I feel inferior to others” as our dependent
variable, which was significant, F (2, 176) = 10.89, p < .001. A Tukey post hoc test showed that participants felt more inferior in the upward condition (M = 3.95 SD = 1.07) compared to the downward condition (M = 3.07, SD = .989) but not the average condition (M = 3.53, SD = 1.03). The participants felt less inferior in the downward condition than the participants in the average condition. SOCIAL COMPARISON, WARNING ON SOCIAL MEDIA 8 A one-way ANOVA test was done with the independent variables, upward vs. downward vs. average, and the ratings of “I feel confident about my abilities” as our dependent variable, F (2, 176) = 6.46, p = .002. A Tukey post hoc test displayed that participants felt significantly more confident about their abilities in the downward condition (M =4.48, SD= 1.02) compared to the upward condition (M =3.78, SD = 1.00) and average condition (M = 4.15, SD=1.18). However, there was no difference between average and upward condition. Study One Discussion The prediction of the study was that participants in the upward condition will more strongly agree with statements that are negative, “I feel inferior to others” and participants in the downward will more strongly agree with statements, “I feel confident about my abilities” compared to the participants in the upward and average conditions. The results did support these predictions that in the upward condition the participants felt bad about themselves compared to the downward and average condition. On the other hand, for ratings of how confident they felt, the results also supported the predictions. Participants felt more confident about their abilities in the downward condition than the upward condition. Further studies will have to be done to see if having insight about what is upward and downward social comparison will change the outcomes. Study two Forewarning is providing an individual with information that they would have otherwise not have known before time. By having a warning, the individual will start processing that information, which may have an impact on their feelings toward what is going to happen in the future. Providing individuals with a forewarning will increase the likelihood of that person being SOCIAL COMPARISON, WARNING ON SOCIAL MEDIA 9 persuaded by the information they received, and this will in return have an effect on their selfimage. The impact of internet forewarning on ratings of attraction was researched by Leon, et al. (2003). The study looked at attraction between male and females. This was done providing the participants with pictures of the people online. Half of the participants were given a forewarning message about deceiving people online, and the other half were given no message, just a statement about the use of the internet. The participants were then able to rate the attractiveness of the person online, and to see if they would want to continue communicating with that individual. The people in the photos were all different in attractiveness with different financial statuses. The researchers wanted to see if the forewarning would make the participants more cautious about further communications to the individual in the photo. The four conditions were high or low financial stability, with either attractive or not attractive. The results correlated with their hypothesis, where the participants that had a forewarning were more cautious and rated the photos as less attractive, as well as being less likely to continue talking to that person (Leon, et al., 2002). The use of forewarning in this study made them think that the internet was a way of deceiving people, and you should not trust what others post online. A more recent study conducted by Pena and Pan (2016) looked at how being exposed to skinny/obese and attractive/unattractive models on websites should influences their choice of wording when replying to a pro-weight lost or anti-weight loss program for advice. The hypothesis for the study was that participants who were exposed to good-looking and thin people were more predicted to engage in upward social comparison and give highly motivated advised. On the contrary, people who are obese and not attractive are predicated to engage in downward social comparison, and give weight loss advice that is low of comparison standard. The SOCIAL COMPARISON, WARNING ON SOCIAL MEDIA 10 participants may develop stereotypes associated with thin and overweight people and make judgments on that. The results concluded that participants exposed to overweight images used words like weight and thin which lead to downward social comparison. It also displayed the stereotypes of other people’s bodies who are skinny (Pena & Pan, 2016). A study by Tiggeman et al. (2012), suggested that the media should put a caption on pictures that are digitally photoshopped. This would forewarn people that the image is fake, and they were engaging in upward or downward comparison. The researchers wanted to see the impact that was associated with women’s body dissatisfaction of having warnings that were specific, nonspecific, and no warning labels on fashion magazines. The participants were given magazines with no warning and warning labels. The results showed that there was no difference in results for warning or no warning labels showed for experiment one. However, for the specific warning label resulted in an increase in women’s body dissatisfaction (Tiggeman, et al., 2012). In a study by Brown and Tiggeman (2016), the researchers wanted to test the impact of attractive celebrities on one’s body image. All the images they collected for the study were from Instagram. The results concluded that people being exposed to good-looking celebrities had a negative feeling about themselves, along with having a negative view of their bodies (Brown & Tiggemen, 2016). This showed that being exposed to people who are prettier than you can damage your self-esteem. Another way that social media effects individuals is the way it tends to cause people to imitate their behavior. A study was conducted by Hinduja and Patchin (2013), where they believed that teens are influenced by their friends and family’s behaviors at school. The researchers wanted to test if peers, adults, or family had an influence on cyberbullying in teenagers. The results showed that if their friends are engaging in this behavior, then the SOCIAL COMPARISON, WARNING ON SOCIAL MEDIA 11 individual said they have also engaged in cyberbullying. Furthermore, the teenagers that were influenced by their parents or adults that told them bullying is not acceptable, then they were less likely to engage in that behavior (Hinduja & Patchin, 2013). This study displays that people you are influenced by can play a role in your actions, despite being good or bad. The evidence from previous studies suggests that being exposed or forewarned about a topic can influence the way you think about yourself and that having a forewarning about the topic can be harmful to individual’s health because people will feel negatively about themselves, in study two we will explore this idea. The independent variable in study two is forewarning. We want to know if there’s a difference between forewarning or no warning of the message, along with which conditions will make them feel inferior to others or more confident compared to others. Like in study 1, we expect that those who are in the upward condition will have lower confidence and higher feelings of inferiority than those in the downward condition. We also predict an interaction effect between social comparison and forewarning. That is, we predict downward comparisons with forewarning will cause an increase in confidence, whereas upward comparison with no forewarning will causes a decrease in confidence. On the contrary, upward comparison with forewarning and downward comparison with no forewarning will fall between these two extremes. Method Participants Two-hundred and twenty-five participants took place in this study, 40.0% (N= 90) are college students from Florida International University and 60.0 % (N =135) are not students from Florida International University, these were family and friends that were recruited to participate SOCIAL COMPARISON, WARNING ON SOCIAL MEDIA 12 in study two. Of the two-hundred and twenty-five participants 36.0% (N =81) were male, 63.1% (N =142) were female, .4% (N =1) were other, and .4% (N =1) did not report. The age ranged from a minimum of 14 years old to a maximum of 75 years old, with an average mean age of M = 27.18 (SD = 10.48). Our sample consisted of 15.6% (N = 35) Caucasians, 66.7 % Hispanics (N = 150), 1.8% (N = 4) Native Indian, 10.2% (N= 23) African American, 1.8% (N = 4) Asian American, and 4.0% (N =9) Others. Our sample consisted of 63.1% (N = 142) of people were taught English as their first language, 12.9% (N =29) did not speak English, and 24% (N = 54) were other. Materials and Procedure The researchers asked for participants that were friends and family members to take part in the online survey. The participants in each study were asked for verbal consent to participate in the study. Once the individual agreed to be a part of the study, they were presented with the risks and benefits of the study. After, the individual knew the risk and benefits the materials were presented to them. The materials that were used for this study consisted of a laptop and the survey was on Qualtrics. The participants were randomly assigned to upward and downward condition and also used random assignment to assign participants to forewarning and no warning condition to the Facebook pages. The upward Facebook profile displayed Pat Masters as having good performance on the job interview. However, on the downward Facebook profile it displayed Pat Maters doing bad on the job interview. The materials that were used for this was forewarning or not warning on social comparison. This study was a Qualtrics survey conducted online for the participants. There were five parts to this study: Part one of the study was reading about the Facebook profile on Pat Masters and forming an impression about this person. Parts two and three asked about SOCIAL COMPARISON, WARNING ON SOCIAL MEDIA 13 participant’s ratings of their own confidence and impressions of the profile. Participants rated their feelings on a Likert type rating scale ranging from 1-6, with one being “strongly disagree” and six being “strongly agree”. Part four asked participants six questions about their demographics. Random assignment was used to assign participants into upward warning, upward no warning, downward warning, and downward no warning condition. Lastly, the participants were debriefed the purpose and hypotheses of the study. The first independent variable was social comparison with two levels (upward and downward). The second independent variable was participants being forewarned about social comparison (warning vs. no warning). The dependent variables were “I feel confident about my abilities” and “I feel inferior to others at this moment.”. Results The first 2 x 2 factorial ANOVA was analyzed by social comparison conditions (upward and downward) and forewarning (absent or present) as our independent variables. The dependent variable was question nine “I feel inferior to others at this moment”. There was a significant main effect on prime (upward and downward), F (1, 221) =14.845, p < .001. Participants in the upward condition (M = 3.00, SD = 1.770) felt significantly more inferior to others then those in the downward condition (M = 2.23, SD = 1.144). There was a significant effect on forewarning, F (1, 221) = 2.606, p = .002. The participants in the forewarning condition (M = 2.31, SD = 1.325) felt significantly less inferior to others than those in no warning group (M = 2.92, SD = 1.671). There was no significant interaction effect between social comparison and forewarning, F (1, 221) = 5.378, p = .108. SOCIAL COMPARISON, WARNING ON SOCIAL MEDIA 14 The second 2 x 2 factorial ANOVA was analyzed by social comparison (upward and downward) and the warning message (warning or no warning) as independent variables. The dependent variable was “I feel confident about my abilities.” There was a significant main effect in the social comparison condition, F (1, 221) = 5.378, p = .021. Participants in the upward condition (M = 4.36, SD = 1.427) felt significantly less confident about themselves than participants in the downward condition (M = 4.72, SD = 1.192). There was a significant main effect on forewarning, F (1, 221) = 32.189, p < .001. Those who were warned felt significantly more confident (M = 4.99, SD = .932) about themselves than those who were not warned (M = 4.06, SD = 1.504). However, there was no significant effect between prime and forewarning condition, F (1, 221) = 3.205, p = .075. Discussion Study Two In study two we analyzed two main effects and one interaction effect for the dependent variables (“I feel inferior to others at the time” and “I feel confident about my abilities”). We predicted that the participants would feel negatively about themselves after seeing a successful profile compared to an unsuccessful profile. Also, we predicted that the participants who received forewarning would rate themselves as feeling worse. For the first dependent variable “I feel inferior to others at this time”, the results did support our predictions. Participants who were in the upward condition felt significant worse about themselves then those in downward condition. The results also displayed that the participants who received a warning did feel significantly worse about themselves than the participants that did not get a warning. Furthermore, we predicted a main effect interaction between prime and forewarning for both dependent variables. However, the results did not support these predictions. General Discussion SOCIAL COMPARISON, WARNING ON SOCIAL MEDIA 15 Throughout both studies, the results displayed that priming and warning messages played a role in the way people rated themselves either confident or inferior. The participants in the upward condition will more strongly agree with statements that are negative, “I feel inferior to others” and participants in the downward will more strongly agree with statements, “I feel confident about my abilities.” The results did support these predictions. Furthermore, our results did display that participants who received a warning message would rate themselves more negatively compared to the group that got no warning message. Furthermore, the results displayed on the interaction effect between priming and forewarning did not support our predictions. Since the upward and downward priming and warning of the message showed no support further research will have to be done to find out the relationship between these variables. Overall, both studies displayed an effect on priming upward and downward, this supports previous findings, where participants would display inferior feelings to their body image, with people that are more beautiful on social media, than the person would have negative feelings. The researchers result coincided with the author’s hypothesis that the participants who used Facebook and look at good-looking users, have negative emotion afterwards and do not feel good with their body appearance (Haferkamp & Kramer, 2011). The warning of a message influences the priming conditions, upward and downward. This study displays how feelings of one’s self-concept can change when being exposed to people doing better or worse off than yourself. According to Brown and Tiggeman (2016), they concluded that people being exposed to good-looking celebrities had a negative feeling about themselves, along with having a negative view of their bodies (Brown & Tiggemen, 2016). This showed that being exposed to people who are prettier than you can damage your self-esteem. This study compared to ours due to the fact that participants had the same feelings if the person SOCIAL COMPARISON, WARNING ON SOCIAL MEDIA 16 in the Facebook profile was doing better than themselves or worse off than themselves they would feel inferior or confident when comparing themselves with the Facebook profile. The results in our study may have contained multiple limitations and factors. In future studies there should be a wider range of the sample population. The sample population consisted of mostly Hispanics, many of them did not speak English as their first language. This factor could cause a language barrier with the study because they may have not fully understood what was being explained in English. Furthermore, the sample population was mostly made up of young college students, which does not expand our research to older adults. Our study did have strong main effects on independent and dependent variables that were being tested throughout the study. However, we should create a larger sample size with more diversity to look at the between interaction effects on the variables. Another variable that should be further looked at in future studies is a person’s self-esteem. If this person has high or low self-esteem the results could be different. Researchers should take into consideration the emotional state of the individual since forewarning and priming could influence this behavior. The implications of human behavior on this study display that individuals should be cautious when using social media; not everything you see on the computer is how you must look or act as a person. Social media could be harmful to one’s self-concept and could cause you to feel worse about yourself when you start comparing to other individuals. There’s a lot of internal and external factors that play an effect in this study. For example, social media by itself can have harmful effects on one’s self-concept. Individuals should be aware of the effects that social media plays on our everyday lives because social media impacts our behaviors and self-esteem when users use it daily. SOCIAL COMPARISON, WARNING ON SOCIAL MEDIA 17 References Brown, Z., & Tiggemann, M. Attractive celebrity and peer images on Instagram: Effect on womens mood and body image. (2016). Body Image, 19, 37– 43.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2016.08.007 (2016). Haferkamp, N., & Krämer, N. C. Social Comparison 2.0: Examining the effects of online profiles on social-networking sites. (2011). Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 14(5), 309–314. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2010.0120 Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. W. Social influences on cyberbullying behaviors among middle and high school students. (2013). Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42(5), 711–722. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-012-9902-4 Lee, S. Y. How do people compare themselves with others on social network sites?: The case of Facebook. (2014). Computers in Human Behavior, 32, 253–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.12.009 Leon, D. T., Rotunda, R. J., Sutton, M. A., & Schlossman, C. Internet forewarning effects on ratings of attraction. (2003). Computers in Human Behavior, 19(1), 39–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0747-5632(02)00017-1 Peña, J., & Pan, W. Words of advice: Exposure to website model pictures and online persuasive messages affects the linguistic content and style of women’s weight-related social support messages. (2016). Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 208–217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.032 SOCIAL COMPARISON, WARNING ON SOCIAL MEDIA 18 Tiggemann, M., Slater, A., Bury, B., Hawkins, K., & Firth, B. Disclaimer labels on fashion magazine advertisements: Effects on social comparison and body dissatisfaction. (2013). Body Image, 10(1), 45–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2012.08.001 Vogel, E. A., Rose, J. P., Roberts, L. R., & Eckles, K. Social comparison, social media, and selfesteem. (2014). Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 3(4), 206–222. https://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000047 Vries, D. A. D., & Kühne, R. Facebook and self-perception: Individual susceptibility to negative social comparison on Facebook. (2015). Personality and Individual Differences, 86, 217– 221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.05.029 Wang, J.-L., Wang, H.-Z., Gaskin, J., & Hawk, S. The mediating roles of upward social comparison and self-esteem and the moderating role of social comparison orientation in the association between social networking site usage and subjective well-being. (2017). Frontiers in Psychology, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00771 SOCIAL COMPARISON, WARNING ON SOCIAL MEDIA Table 1 Manipulation Check for Condition Variable Levels of Variable Percentage Upward 82.5 Downward 79.3 I didn’t notice 12.4 2(2) =142.050, p < .001 Manipulation Check for Warning Variable Levels of Variable Percentage Warning 77.3 No warning 25.2 I didn’t notice 20.0 2(2) =7.772, p < .001 19 SOCIAL COMPARISON, WARNING ON SOCIAL MEDIA 20 Table 2 2x2 ANOVA on Anagram Performance Source Sum of df Square Mean F p 71.024 .000 Square Corrected model 533.054 3 177.685 Intercept 23266.714 1 23266.714 9300.091 .000 Ink color 76.827 1 76.827 30.709 .000 Warning 373.979 1 373.979 149.485 .000 Ink color*Warning 8.246 1 8.246 3.296 .071 Error 522.870 209 2.502 Total 25376.000 213 SOCIAL COMPARISON, WARNING ON SOCIAL MEDIA 21 Table 3 2x2 ANOVA I Feel Confident About my Abilities Source Sum of df Square Mean F p Square Corrected model 61.044 3 20.348 13.509 .000 Intercept 4609.385 1 4609.385 3060.137 .000 IV1 Prime 8.101 1 8.101 5.378 .021 IV2 Forewarning 48.485 1 48.485 32.189 .000 IV1 Prime*IV2 Forewarning 4.828 1 4.828 3.205 .075 Error 332.885 221 1.506 Total 5027.000 225

Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:

Turnitin Report

Formatting

Title Page

Citation

Outline

Place an Order