NAME ATTRACTIVENESS 1
Written Assignment # 3
Due Date: Friday December 14th by 3:00 p.m. (Late papers will not be accepted).
You have been provided with the Introduction and Method Section for a research paper on the Effects of Attractiveness of First Names on Academic Achievement (see Attached). For the final written assignment for this course you are to write the Results, Discussion and Abstract for this study. For this assignment you must submit:
1) A proper APA formatted Title page.
2) A Results section. This should include a Table of the Means and Standard Deviations, A figure and a statistical interpretation of the ANOVAs.
3) A discussion section
4) An Abstract (no longer than 120 words).
Please remember that all sections of an APA paper are double spaced!
The Following Tables are the SPSS print-outs for the analysis of the Name Attractiveness study data.
Descriptive Statistics
Evaluation Condition / Name Type / Mean / Std. Deviation / NAnonymous / Unattractive / 77.9000 / 11.1398 / 20
Attractive / 68.3000 / 11.6533 / 20
Total / 73.6000 / 11.3994 / 40
Random / Unattractive / 72.7500 / 10.5275 / 20
Attractive / 78.7500 / 12.0956 / 20
Total / 75.2500 / 11.3386 / 40
Identified / Unattractive / 69.6000 / 16.8598 / 20
Attractive / 69.1500 / 15.3152 / 20
Total / 69.3750 / 16.1060 / 40
Total / Unattractive / 73.4167 / 13.5375 / 60
Attractive / 72.0667 / 13.7556 / 60
Total / 72.7417 / 13.6469 / 60
Two- Way ANOVA
Source / Sum of Squares / df / Mean Square / F / Sig.Name Attractiveness / 54.675 / 1 / 54.675 / 1.257 / .227
Evaluation Condition / 734.517 / 2 / 367.258 / 1.217 / .304
Name Attractiveness X Evaluation Condition / 1726.165 / 2 / 863.083 / 19.846 / .001
Error / 2515.357 / 57 / 43.489
One-way ANOVA for ANONOMOUS EVALUATION CONDITION
Source / Sum of Squares / df / Mean Square / F / Sig.NAME ATTRACTIVENESS / 1123.600 / 1 / 1123.600 / 20.113 / .002
Error / 1061.400 / 19 / 55.863
One-way ANOVA for RANDOM EVALUATION CONDITION
Source / Sum of Squares / df / Mean Square / F / Sig.NAME ATTRACTIVENESS / 490.000 / 1 / 490.000 / 7.412 / .021
Error / 3170.847 / 19 / 66.105
One-way ANOVA for IDENTIFIED EVALUATION CONDITION
Source / Sum of Squares / df / Mean Square / F / Sig.NAME ATTRACTIVNESS / 2.025 / 1 / 2.025 / .238 / .631
Error / 3170.847 / 19 / 8.499
How to Write the Results Section
The results section summarizes the data and the statistical treatment of them. Do not interpret the results or discuss their implications in this section. Remember, a reader who is not interested in the specific numbers obtained or the statistics employed should be able to skip this section without missing any information about how or why the data supported, or failed to support the hypothesis tested.
Results sections should report all results in a manner that is easiest for the reader to comprehend. Actual data can be presented within the text. For example, “The mean scores for males and females were 12.5 sec (s = 1.45) and 15.4 (s = 1.34) respectively.” This is fine if only a few statistics need to be reported. When larger numbers of statistics need to be presented it is better to use tables. Often, the pattern of interactions is easier for the reader to comprehend when they are presented in a figure.
Generally, in results sections descriptive statistics are given first. Recall that descriptive statistics summarize and organize the data collected. When the purpose of the analysis is to compare group means, the means of all conditions, as well as their standard deviations should be presented. One of the easiest and most comprehensible ways to do this is to construct a table. Although there are a small number of conditions to summarize in this write up, I do want you to include a table in your write up. (Please, see your text for the proper format; pg. 353 and 352).
Things to Keep in Mind:
- Each table presented on a separate page.
- Table is numbered.
- Title of the table is given.
- first letter of all major words in the title are capitalized
- Entire title is underlined.
- title is left justified and can carry over to as many lines as necessary
- Title should be as short as possible, but should also fully define what is in the table.
- All rows and columns should be clearly labeled.
In the text of your manuscript you do need to tell the reader to look at the table. The table itself goes at the end of the paper.
Next the inferential statistics are presented. Do this by first stating what type of analysis was run and why it was run. Since the pattern of results is more clearly depicted in graphic form, for this assignment I am requiring you toinclude a figure. Similar to tables, figures are referred to in the text (tell the reader to see Figure 1) but the actual figure is placed at the end of the paper. Unlike Tables, the title for a figure goes on a separate page and the figure goes on the following page. All axis must be labeled. You do not need to use a fancy computer program for your figure. I will accept a neatly hand drawn Figure.
1) All numbers should be rounded to 2 decimal places, with the possible exception of p values. If the p value can be meaningfully expressed with 2 decimal places (i.e., p = .02) than 2 decimal places are fine. If the p value requires a third decimal place to be meaningful (i.e., p = .003) then use three decimal points. If the SPSS computer print-out gives the p value as .000 (which we know is impossible) report it as p < .001.
2) All statistics have abbreviations (usually an alphabet letter, or a Greek symbol) which are used by convention. When a letter is used to indicate a statistic, the letter is italicized. The letters that statistical abbreviations you are likely to use are M, which refers to Mean, s which refer to standard deviation, F which refers to the F statistic, and p which refers to the probability of making a Type I error.
Results
The mean Happiness Ratings and standard deviations for the males and females in each Marital Status group are presented in Table 1. In order to determine if there are significant differences in Happiness Ratings between Sexes or among Marital Status groups and if there is an interaction between these two variables, a two-way ANOVA was conducted. The means of each Marital Status group for each Sex arepresented in Figure 1. A significant main effect was found for Marital Status (F(2, 54) = 7.13, p = .002). Least Squares Difference multiple comparison analyses revealed that married persons rated themselves as significantly happier than either single persons (p = .01) or divorced persons (p = .001). Happiness Ratings for single and divorced persons did not significantly differ from each other. The main effect of sex was not significant; therefore males and females did not differ overall on their happiness ratings.
A significant interaction was obtained between Sex and Marital Status (F(2,54) = 11.65, p = .001), therefore the relationship between Marital Status and Happiness is different for males than it is for females. To determine the effect of Marital Status on Happiness ratings for each Sex, one-way ANOVAs were conducted individually for males and for females. A significant effect of Marital Status was found for males (F(2, 27) = 19.87, p < .001). Least Squares Difference multiple comparison analyses showed that married males rated themselves as significantly happier than single (p < .001) and divorced males (p < .001). No significant difference was found between single and married males. Analysis of female’s ratings showed no significant effect of Marital Status. Thus, for females there was no relationship found between marital status and happiness.
The Table, Figure Caption and Figure are each on separate pages at the very end of the paper.
Table 1
Means for Married, Single and Divorced Males and Females
Single / Married / Divorced / TotalMales / 4.20
(1.13) / 7.70
(1.49) / 4.90
(1.28) / 5.73
(1.99)
Females / 6.60
(1.17) / 5.60
(1.26) / 5.00
(2.21) / 5.73
(1.70)
Total / 5.40
(1.67) / 6.65
(1.72) / 5.60
(1.76) / 5.67
(1.83)
Note. Standard deviations are presented in parenthesis.
Figure Caption
Figure 1. Mean Happiness Ratings for Single, Married and Divorced Males and Females.
How to Write a Discussion Section
In this section you discuss what the results mean. What do they say about the questions being asked (the purpose of the study)? Do the results support the existence of name evaluation effects? Discuss all of the Effects (both main effects and the interaction) that have been tested.
Discussion sections also include discussion of alternative explanations for the results. You should discuss whether there are any threats to internal validity. What about the selection of subjects? Does the study have Gerneralizability (external validity) limitations? This study is a quasi-experiment and thus it lacks internal validity. You might want to include suggestions for future experimental studies.
How to Write an Abstract
The Abstract is a very brief (very concise and specific summary of the paper). It is placed on a separate page, immediately following the Title page. (I.e., the Abstract is always on page 2). The word Abstract is centered at the top of the page. The text of the Abstract is a single paragraph (should not be longer than 120 words). Do not indent the first line of the paragraph 5 spaces but do use double spacing. Although brief the abstract needs to include the following:
- State why the study was run.
- A sentence stating who the participants were (how many, sex, groups)
- The basic procedure and design. This should make clear what the dependant variable is (what was being measured) and what comparisons were being made.
- Results of the Analysis (in words – do not put the p, orF values – do not include the means)
- Relate the results back to the purpose of the study.
I have included an example of an abstract below.
Abstract
Previous research indicates that Marital Status affects Happiness Ratings (Jones, 1999). This study was run to determine if these findings generalize to males and females in GrantCounty. Thirty adult males and females were interviewed to obtain their Happiness Rating. One third of each Sex group were single, another third were married and the remaining third were divorced. Consistent with previous studies, married persons rated themselves as happier than either single or divorced persons. This finding however held only for males. No differences in Happiness Rating among the Marital Status groups were found for females.
NAME ATTRACTIVENESS 1
The Effects of Attractiveness of First Names on Essay Grades
"What's in a name?" asked Shakespeare. "That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet." That may be; but would a boy named Rose ever get a job as a professional wrestler? Does the evaluative stereotype associated with names affect the judgments that others make about us? Although the psychological impact of evaluative name stereotypes was once described as the "neglected social variable" (Albott & Bruning, 1970, p. 527), the issue has received considerable attention in recent years (Bruning, Polinko, Zerbst & Buckingham, 2000; Erwin, 1995). The stereotypical evaluation of first names, though not as immediately obvious as stereotyping based on race or gender, has nonetheless been shown to have a number of important consequences. A name may be the first or only piece of information known about another person, and individuals may already have internalized prior expectations about names and behave according to those expectations.
A recent study (Bruning et al., 2000) found that people tend to predict career success based on how well a person's name matches the gender associated with their vocation. Bruner asked participants to read descriptions of people--including their name and occupation--and found that they deemed women with a more feminine name like Emma more likely to be successful in traditional female occupations such as nursing, while men with a more masculine name like Hank were expected to excel at jobs like plumbing--traditionally considered a male career. These findings surprised even the researcher who predicted that “… with today's political correctness, everybody would be assumed to be able to do everything equally well” (p. 199). Bruner suggests that parents "be aware of the name they give [because it] probably does reflect their expectations for the child" (p.200).
Name evaluations have been shown to affect social perceptions, such as evaluations of physical attractiveness (Erwin, 1993); self-perception, personality development, and the behavioral patterns of children (Dion, 1983); popularity (McDavid & Harari, 1966); expectations of academic achievement (Erwin & Calev, 1984); and the actual grades awarded to students' essays (Harari & McDavid, 1973). Although most research findings have indicated that positively evaluated first names are usually associated with more positive outcomes for the individuals concerned, some studies have also shown the opposite--that unattractive names may be associated with a variety of positive personal characteristics and abilities (e.g., Tompkins & Boor, 1980). Bruning (1972) suggested that because unattractive names are less common within a culture, the people who bear them are more noticeable and memorable and that such names possibly encourage a "striving for uniqueness related to a positive sense of self-esteem" (Zweigenhaft, 1981, p. 297). In support of this suggestion, some research has been conducted that indicates that unusual names may be associated with higher levels of academic performance (Erwin, 1995). In some professions, such as academia, an unusual name can be a positive advantage--for example, it is interesting to note the number of major figures in psychology with unusual names (Sadowski, Wheeler, & Cash, 1983).
The purpose of the current study was to investigate two of the themes raised by the existing research on name stereotypes. The effects of the attractiveness of Names (unattractive or Attractive) identified on freshman entrance essay exams from a British university were assessed by professors under three Evaluation conditions. This approach to the research question had the advantage of using genuine, real-life data rather than responses to the limited range of artificial stimulus materials used in most previous studies. In the first Evaluation condition, grades awarded to essays written by attractively and unattractively named students are compared when the writer of the exam is identified only by their student number. Since the name of the writer in this condition is unknown to the grader, differences in grades between Name conditions can be attributed solely to differences in the quality of the actual essays. In the second Evaluation condition, essays are randomly assigned an attractive or unattractive first name. Since the names identified on these essays are not related to the attractiveness of the actual writers’ names, differences in grades between Name conditions can be attributed solely to name stereotype effects. In the third condition the names of the actual writers are identified on the exams. Grades assigned to essays in this condition may be affected by name stereotypes and/or actual differences in the quality of essays produced by students in different Name conditions.
Method
Participants
Sixty University professors from a British university were recruited to participate as graders in this study. Each participant was paid a stipend to compensate them for their time and effort. All of the professors currently held an instructional position at the university and had at least two years experience evaluating freshman entrance exams but had not served as essay evaluator in the fall session of 2010. The participants were told that the purpose of the study was to evaluate the reliably of essay grading procedures at the university. Twenty professors were randomly assigned to each of the three Evaluation conditions.
Materials
Freshmen Entrance Essays for 180 students who had attended the university were obtained from archival records. All of the essays were submitted for evaluation in the fall session of 2010. Only essay of students with Anglo-European names were included. All essays were typed in a double spaced format using a 12 point font and one inch page margins.
Twenty student volunteers rated the attractiveness of the first names of all 180 essay writers. Volunteers ranged in age from 19 to 45 years and were from a variety of social and economic backgrounds. Ratings were performed on a 7-point scale ranging from very unattractive (1) to very attractive (7). Ratings were then averaged for each name. Examples of attractive names are Jake (M = 5.2) and Luisa (M = 4.8). Examples of names rated as unattractive are Harold (M = 2.0) and Pauline (M = 2.25). The essays were split into three sets. The first set consisted of essays written by those students with the most unattractive names (an average of 2.5 or below on the rating scale; n = 44). The second set consisted of essays written by students with neutral names (an average of 2.6 to 4.5 on the rating scale; n = 74) and the third set consisted of essays written by students with attractive names (an average above 4.6 on the rating scale; n = 62. ) Ten essays written by females and ten essays written by males were randomly drawn from the unattractive and from the attractive name sets for use in this study.
Design and Procedure
A 2 (Name Condition) X 3 (Evaluation Condition) mixed factorial design was used. Each professor was assigned all 40 essays to evaluate. These essays were delivered to their offices along with the standard freshman essay grading instructions provided by the university. The writer’s of the essays provided to the professors in the Anonymous Evaluation condition were identified only by their student number. The first names assigned to essays in the Random Name Evaluation condition were printed prominently on the cover page of the essays. The actual first names of the writers of the essays provided to the identified Evaluation condition were similarly printed prominently on the title page of the essay. Each professor was given two weeks to complete the grading task and was asked not to confer with other professors regarding their assessments. After all graded essays were submitted the participating professors were informed of the true purpose of the study.
References
Albott, W. L., & Bruning, J. L. (1970). Given names: A neglected social variable. Psychological Record, 20, 527-533.
Bruning, J. L. (1972). The effects of connotative meaning on the learning of names. The Journal of Social Psychology, 86, 105-110.
Bruning, J., Polinko, N. T,.Zerbst-J.I; & Buckingham,-J.T (2000). The effect on expected job success of the connotative meanings of names and nicknames. Journal-of-Social-Psychology. 140(2), 197-201.
Dion, K. L. (1983). Names, identity, and self. Names, 31, 245-257.
Erwin, P. G. (1993). First names and perceptions of physical attractiveness.The Journal of Psychology, 127, 625-631.