Ch. 6-12 Flashcards
(94 cards)
1
Q
Opportunities of Internet Research
A
Compared to other modes of collecting data is:
- Less expensive
- Easier to conduct
2
Q
How does internet research work?
A
- Post ad on specialized website, ie. Social Psych Network or American Psychological Society
- Send email to online community (ie. Listserve)
3
Q
Opportunities of internet research:
Decreasing the costs
A
Decrease the Costs
- of recruiting large, diverse, or specialized samples of research subjects
- Ie. Nosek et al. (2002) collected over 2.5 million responses on IAT in 5 years
4
Q
Internet Research: Easier to Conduct
A
- No longer need access into intro psych courses
- Do NOT need grant money to pay subjects
- Demographic data collection – researchers at small schools or independent research
- Avoidance of time constraints
- Round the clock data collection!
- Avoidance of organizational difficulties such as scheduling because thousands can participate at once
5
Q
Easier to Conduct: Observing Social Behavior
A
- Study on-line groups to understand group formation and change
- Conversations are pre-transcribed
- There are automated coding and content-analysis tools
Examples:
- Baym (1998): studied way groups develop sense of community by examining an email distribution list about soap operas over several years
- Bruckmann (1999): studied influence of groups on long-term learning by examining online conservations of 475 children learning a programming language over 5 years
6
Q
Easier to conduct: Access to Archival Data
A
- Detailed transaction logs that people leave when using the internet can be used for studies of preference and choice
- Ie. Browsing behavior, software use, purchasing behavior, file uploads and downloads, subscription to communication forums
7
Q
Easier to conduct: Automated
A
- Low marginal cost of each additional subject, close to zero!
- COMPARE TO: postal mail surveys may cost close to $2 per subject; telephone surveys cost about $40-100 per subject
8
Q
Easier to conduct: Experimental Control
A
- COMPARED TO paper based surveys: web surveys are flexible
- Less error prone (b/c don’t require human transcription – no data entry)
- Reduction in experimenter effects
- Reduction in demand characteristics
9
Q
Challenges of Internet Research: Data Quality
A
-
Sample biases
- To whom does web-based research generalize?
- Good external validity new for social psych who often use colleges students
- But internet users tend to be White, young and have children
- Lower response rates than telephone & paper surveys
- Dropouts: esp. for longitudinal data b/c ppl frequently change email addresses
- Possible multiple submissions by SAME person
- Anonymous nature allows people to participate frivolously or with malicious intent
10
Q
Challenges of Internet Research:
Lack of Control over Data Collection Setting
A
In Lab we can:
- Verify subjects’ identities, age or gender
- Monitor behavior to ensure that they’re involved & serious
- Intervene if perceive undesirable effects
11
Q
How to do deal with malicious responses
A
- May require LARGER samples to compensate for great error rate
- But can set up identifiers for invited subjects and do systematic data mining for anomalous data patterns
12
Q
Challenges of Internet Research:
Protection of Human Subjects
A
- NOT riskier than research through other means
- But, online research changes the nature of risks and investigator’s ability to assess them
13
Q
Ambiguities of Internet Research
A
-
Is the subject identifiable or anonymous?
- even pseudonyms can be linked to real names & responses can be tracked to individuals
- Breach of confidentiality (GREATEST RISK)
-
Do we need consent for online communication forums with unrestrcted memberships?
- Posters do NOT have expectation of privacy or do they?
-
Harm resulting from direct participation in research (ie. emotional reactions)
- Can post debrief materials & even tailor info to specific consition of subject (but cannot assess subject’s state)
14
Q
In Summary
A
- online research has some major advantages (Low cost, diverse subject pool) to traditional means of conducting social psych research)
15
Q
What is a Longitudinal Study?
A
- studying something over time…at least 2 time points
- can study stability vs. change
- Ex) Time 1 = beginning of school
- Time 2 = end of school year
16
Q
Longitudinal Study: Advantage of Sampling More than Once
A
- does NOT rely on retrospective (thinking back) reports
- you report immediately
- more accurate
17
Q
Diary or Experience Sampling Methods (ESM)
A
- can record daily events
- go about everyday lives except that asked to report what you have done or experienced or felt (via electronic or paper diary) at some interval
- report at specific intervals: once a day, or specific times a day (after each mean) or specific time intervals (every hour)
- at a signal from the researcher (email prompt, text message)
- when an event occurs (when on a date)
- *depends on phenomenon under study
18
Q
Paper & Pencil Diaries
A
**easy to implement, **but:
- participants may forget to write in their diary
- potential for retrospection error for missed entries
- burden of data entry and handling
Benefits:
- can reprint the dates & times of expected responses on diary sheets
- prompt entries with pagers, preprogrammed wristwates, phone calls, or mobile phones (alarm, email, text msgs)
19
Q
Electronic Diaries
A
- NO data entry
- allow for signaling/reminders
- date & time-stamp entries
- better response rates
- later questions can be sensitive to earlier responses
- **BEST/PREFERRED method!!
20
Q
Which Kind of Diary Do You Use?
A
- depends on sample (practical) & goals of study (theoretical)
21
Q
Meta-Analysis
A
- quanititative approach for systematically combining results of previous research to arrive at conclusions about the body of research
- can combine heterogeneous data from heterogeneous studies
- POPULAR - they have steadily increased
22
Q
Origins of Meta Analysis: The Great Debate
A
- 1951: Hans J. Eysenck → NO favorable effects of psychotherapy
- 1978: Gene V. Glass → statistically aggregated the findings of 375 psychotherapy outcome studies, concluded that psychotherapy DID work
23
Q
Why Do We Use Meta Analysis?
A
- traditional methods of review focus on statistical significance testing
- significance testing is NOT well suited to this task
- highly dependent on sample size
- null finding does NOT carry same “weight” as a significant finding
Why we use meta analysis:
- to synthesize results once a large body of work has been conducted
- to investigate large-scale patterns beyond the scope of individual experiments
24
Q
When do we use meta analysis?
A
collections of research that:
- are empirical, rather than theoretical
- produce quantitative results, rather than qualitative findings
- examine the same constructs & relationships
- have findings that can be configured in a comparable statistical form (ie. a correlation coefficient is used for effect sizes)
25
**Effect Size**
* the "**dependent** variable"
* standardizes findings across studies so can be directly compared
* **any standardized index can be an "effect size"** (ie. correlation coefficient) as long as:
* **comparable across studies** (generally requires standardization)
* represents the **magnitude & direction** of the relationship of interest
* is ****_in_**dependent of sampe size**
* Different meta-analyses may use **different effect sizes**
26
**Conducting: Overview**
**Developing a research question**
**Identify your studies**
**Determine eligibility of studies**
* **Inclusion:** which ones to keep
* **Exclusion:** which ones to throw out
**Abstract Data from the studies**
**Analyze data in the studies**
27
**Searching far and wide for meta-analysis**
The "we only included published studies because they have been peer-reviewed" argument
* Significant findings are more likely to be published than nonsignificant findings
* Critical to try to identify and retrieve all studies that meet your eligibility criteria
* potential sources for identification of documents:
* computerized bibliographic databases
* authors working in the research domains
* conference programs, dissertations, review articles, hand searching relevant journals, reference sections
28
**Methodological adequacy of research base**
* studies often cannot simply be grouped into "good" or "bad" studies
* some methodological weaknesses may bias the overall findings, other may merely add "noise" to the distribution
29
**Interpreting Effect Sizes**
**Cohen's "Rule of Thumb"**
* **standardized mean difference effect size (d)**
* small = 0.20
* medium = 0.50
* large = 0.80
* **correlation coefficient**
* small = 0.10
* medium = 0.25
* large = 0.40
* Rules-of-Thumb do **NOT** take into account the context of the intervention
* **a “small” effect may be highly meaningful f**or an intervention that requires few resources and imposes little on the participants
* small effects may be more meaningful for serious and fairly intractable problems
30
**Sources of bias**
* Publication Bias
* studies that show **_no_** effect are **less** likely to be published
* "file drawer problem"
* Create a **funnel plot** with effect size versus sample size
31
**Funnel Plot: Study Bias**
* Plots the effect size against the sample size of the study
* look at its **LOWER LEFT** corner, that’s where negative or null studies are located
If EMPTY, this indicates **“PUBLICATION BIAS”**
* Note that here, the plot fits in a funnel, and that the left corner is not all that empty, but we **_cannot_** rule out publication bias
32
**Strengths of meta-analysis**
* Represents findings in a more **differentiated and sophisticated** manner than conventional reviews
* Capable of **finding relationships across studies** that are obscured in other approaches
* **Protects against over-interpreting differences** across studies
* Can handle a **large numbers** of studies
33
**Weaknesses of meta-analysis**
Requires a good deal of effort
* “Apples and oranges”; comparability of studies is often in the “eye of the beholder”
* Most meta-analyses include “blemished” studies
* Selection bias poses continual threat
* negative and null finding studies that you were unable to find and outcomes for which there were negative or null findings that were **NOT** reported
34
**Overall conclusion of meta-analysis**
Meta-analysis is a **replicable & defensible method** **of synthesizing findings across studies**
* Meta-analysis often **points out gaps in the research literature**, providing a solid foundation for the next generation of research on that topic
* Meta-analysis illustrates the **importance of replication**
* Meta-analysis **facilitates generalization** of the knowledge gain through _individual_ evaluations
35
**Implicit Association Test (IAT)**
* considered useful measure b/c responses are **beyond intentional control & awareness**
* **\*\* measures social knowledge**
* assesses your associations **over time**
* **1998 Nowek et al.**
36
**Nosek et al. (2007)**
* **2.5 million** completed IATs
* 17 topics
* July 2000 - May 2006
**Topics:**
* **Social Group Attitudes**
* **Social Group Stereotypes**
* **US political Attitudes**
**Sample:**
* Predominantly **WHITE (European Amer.)** **Females**
* mean age was **26**
* 61% of participants aged 25 or older had a **bachelor's degree** or more education
**Findings:**
* implicit & explicit comparative preferences and sterotypes found across gender, ethnicity, age, political orientation and region
* **implicit & explicit attitudes and stereotypes _varied_** a lot across individuals
* implicit & explicit **attitudes and stereotypes** were generaly **positively related**, but strength of relation varied across topics
* **Men** stronger implicit & explicit social group prefernces for **higher-status groups**
* E. Amer & Asians showed stronger social group preferences & stereotypes but varied by topic
* **Adults over 60** showed the **strongest** social preferences & stereotypes implicitly and explicitly
* **conservative**s consistently showed _stronger_ implicit & explicit social preferences and stereotype for **higher-status groups**
* difference was most pronounced **_explicitly_**
*
37
**Implicit Measures**
unintentional, unconscious biased evaluations which are automatically activated by mere presence of attitude object (target group)
outside your awareness
38
**Examples of Implicit Measures**
* Response latency procedures following priming (ie. IAT)
* Memory tasks
* Psychophysiological measures
39
**Utility of Implicit Measures**
thought to assess the **"true"** extent of people's bias (but later challenged)
40
**Concerns with Implicit Measures**
* **stability** of individual differences
* only **modest** relationships btwn diff. implicit measures
41
**Are **_ex_**plicit measures archaic?**
are people lying for socially desirability (SD) reasons?
42
**How to Reduce SD Concern**
**"Bogus Pipeline"** apparatus intended to serve as a **lie-detector**
* told that researcher can assess their true attitude while hooked up to electrodes
* but **CANNOT** be used with children & **time-consuming**
_Other Steps_:
* Assuring anonymity
* Allowing for maximum privacy
* Limiting face-to-face contact btwn subject & experimenter
* Administer SD measures and controlling for responses in analyses
43
**Relation between Explicit & Implicit Measures**
* generally **weak**
44
**Summary of Implicit & Explicit Measures**
* attitudes may be examined at explicit & implicit levels
* _NO_ one level represents "true" attitudes
* different aspects predict diff. types of behavior
45
**Fast Friends Procedure - Aron et al.**
* questions start with simple, less personal questions & gradually toward much more personal and sometimes more serious questions, which develops a sense of closeness between the 2 people in a short period of time
* has been shown to **reduce bias** between groups
46
**Operational Definition of Construct**
# * Define the construct in **several** sentences
* Consider: **what are closely related constructs**- how does your contruct differ from those of other constructs
47
**Decisions, Decisions, Decisions**
* With that definition in mind, what would be an appropriate **closed-ended way** to measure that construct?
* we **DON'T** want to have to code things ourselves
* Should the questions be **subtle or explicit?**
* **Face Validity:** extent to which questionnarie appears to measure what its intended to measure
* the more **explicit** your items are, the higher the face validity
* Open-ended? **NO**
* **Scenarios with several response choices?**
* Question with **yes/no** or **true/false? (forced choice)**
* Statement with **agree/disagree scale**
* label all response choices?
* How many items? (at least 5-10)
* **Internal reliability tends to INC. as the # of items INC.**
* How to **avoid acquiescence** response set - people's tendency to say "yes"/"true"/"agree"
* How to **avoid socially desirable responding**
* Best if **instructions are clear & easy** to understand
48
**Optimism Definition**
people who expect good things to happen to them
49
**Life Orientation Test (Scheier et al. 1994)**
* most established optimism measure
* 2055 undergrads completed the measures
* **Fillers -** used to cover what you're measuring; adds diversity to measure
1. In uncertain times, I usually expect the best
* It's easy for me to relax (filler)
3. If something can go wrong for me, it will\*
* \* = reverse item; adds noise to measurement
* you must **disagree** with this question to score HIGH in optimism
4. I'm always optimistic about my future
* I enjoy my friends a lot (filler)
* It's important for me to keep busy (filler)
7. Ihardly ever expect things to go my way \*
* I don't get upset too easily (filler)
9. I rarely count on good things happening to me\*
10. Overall, I expect more good things to happen to me than bad
50
**Factor Structure of Scale (****Scheier et al. 1994)**
* One factor structure - all items seem to measure the same thing
* **NOT** looking at filler items!
**Factor Loadings**
* Only looking at **FACTOR** loadings/items
* you want them to be **\> 0.5**
51
**Internal Consistency**
* **Cronbach's alpha = .78**
* indicateds internal consistency of responding
* the way you respond to one item is the same to the way you respond to other items
52
**Testing the Measure**
* Internal Consistency
* Test-retest Reliability
53
**Revelant constructs: third variable problem**
* **Trait anxiety**
* **Neuroticism**
* **Self-esteem**
54
**Validity**
* **Convergent Vaildity**
* **Discriminant Validity**
55
**Convergent Validity**
* tests that variables expected to converge, **do correlate**
* you should be able to show a **correspondence or convergence** btwn similar constructs
56
**Discriminant Validity**
* tests that variables expected to be discrepand, do **NOT** correlate
* you should be able to discriminate between dissimilar constructs
57
**Unobtrusive Measures**
* participants are **UNAWARE** that their behavior is being observed or measured
* **concealed, hidden or non-obvious measures**
* alternatives to questionnaires, interviews, etc.
58
**Types of Unobtrusive Measures**
* one-way mirrors
* hidden cameras
* tape recorders
* observing people in a public setting
59
**Examples of Unobtrusive Measures**
* **Discrimination among European Amer. teachers towards African Amer. students** (Taylor 1979)
* **Public acceptance vs. Private rejection** (Page 1993. 1995)
* **Role of automatic obesity stereotypes in real hiring discrimination** (Agerstrom & Rooth 2001)
* **Public opinion polls vs. List experiment** (Streb et al. 2008)
60
**Taylor (1979)**
* found **subtle forms of discrimination** among European Amer. teachers **towards African Amer. students**
* teachers who indicated a high acceptance of students on questionnaire measures showed LESS positive nonverbal & gestural behaviors towards students when eaching interactions were unobtrusively observed thru **one-way mirrors**
61
**Public acceptance vs. Private rejection**
* Page (1993, 1995) **made telephone calls to landlords t**o inquire about publicly advertised rooms for rent & **posed as a former psychiatric patient**
* **90% of landlord falsified info concerning rental status** (indicated the rental was no longer available) - replicated for ppl posing as homosexuals, elderly or HIV positive tenants
* a **discrepancy between attitude & behavior** emerged - latter measures indicated that landlords had NO problems renting to stimatized persons
62
**Role of Automatic Obesity Stereotypes in Real Hiring Discrimination**
* Agerstrom & Rooth (2001) examined how often applicants matched on credentials were invited back for a job interview
* callback rate for **obsese** applicants was significantly **LOWER** than normal weight applicants
* **conducted an** **IAT** several months later
* managers with more **negative** automatic stereotypes about obese were **less** likely to invite an _obese_ applicant for an interview
63
**Public Opinion Polls vs. List Experiment**
**Public Opinion Polls **
* show that majority of Amer. public would vote for a qualified female president
**List Experiment** (Streb et al. 2008)
* one sample that doesn't include question (baseline
* then another sample that includes your comparison
* **26% of participants** expressed **anger** over prospect of a female president
64
**Addressing Ethical Concerns of Unobtrusive Measures**
* studies have to be approved by the IRB
* researchers have to justify their use of unobtrusive measres & show that there's NO reasonable alternative approach to using an obtrusive measure
* debrief participants at the end of the study
65
**Some believe unobtrusive measures are _more_ ethical**
* Web et al. (1996) - argued that these measures are more ethical b/c such measures "may **avoid** the problems of **invasion of privacy** by permitting the research to gain valuable info without ever identifying the individual actors or in any way manipulate them"
66
**Prevalence (or lack thereof) of studies that use unobtrusive measures**
Page (2000) wrote article of Journal of Applied Social Psychology & attributed _decline_ to:
* **INC. popularity/adherence to informed consent**
* **DEC. in use of deception**
* **the effort to conceptualize research participants as cooperative participants**
67
**Accretion Measures**
* another unobtrusive measure
* **Accretion: the things ppl leave behind**
* another way to look @ ppl's **behaviors & attitude**
68
**Erosion Measures**
* Another unobtrusive measure
* allow researchers to examine how people's contact with things and places causes actual, visible, physical wear & tear
* Ex) safety habits - observe wear/tear of seat and seatbelts in cars
* Ex) borecom in classroom - damage to student desks & chairs
69
**Benefits of Unobtrusive Measures**
* allow researchers to **examine behavior w/o triggering any reactivity** from participant
* can **reduce known biases**
* allows researchers to **study discrepancies between attitudes & behavior**
70
**Drawbacks of Obtrusive Measures**
* **_LOW_ internal validity**
* **CANNOT determine causality**
* **confounds/extraneous variables**
* **ethical concerns**
71
**Altering Implicit Attitudes**
* some argue that stereotypes are **activated automatically**
* does **NOT** mean that they are immutable & inevitable
* b/c automaticity develops thru repeated occurrence, practice and overlearning...
* to _change_ implicit attitudes **need counterinfluences**, **extensive retraining**
72
**"Just Say No" [to drugs] public health campaign**
* made popular in the US in 1980s by Nancy Reagan
* based on idea of social inoculation Dr. Richard I. Evans - learning how to **resist peer pressure**
73
**Kawakami et al (2000; Study 1)**
* tested on undergrads in Netherlands
* **Stroop Test:** read word NOT color; when color of word matches with word, you should read it faster
**Hypothesis:** extensive training in negating specific stereotype associations would decrease automatic stereotype activation
**Procedure:**
1. Stroop Pre-test
2. Extensive training (480 trials) in negating stereotypic associations
3. Stroop Post-test
**Results:**
* people who went thru training in post-test, they had shorter latencies (response time was quicker) - they said no to the associations
**Pre-test:** Ps were presented with category label ("skinheads") followed by a stereotypic trait (ie. aggressive) that was printed in 1 of 4 colors
* Read the first word to yourself and then as quickly as you can name the color of the second word
* Ps **must direct their attention toward the naming of the ink-_colors_** and AWAY from the semantic meaning of the words
* **If semantic stereotypes are automatically activated,** they **will _interfere_ with the color naming** response and produce longer latencies (it'll take you _longer_ to say the color)
* it's only distracting if the ps finds a connection between skinhead and aggression
**Extensive Training**
* Ps were instructed to _NOT_ activate cultural associations when presented with a picture of a member of a particular category (ie. skinheads)
* if you see stereotypic associations (ie. a skinhead picture with the word "aggressive") "just say NO!"
**Stroop Post-test**
* Ps did **NOT** receive instructions to negate stereotypic associations
* **None** of the traits were ones used in first 2 phases of the experiment
74
**Kawakami et al (2000; Study 3)**
* US undergraduates
* Same trial but for **Stroop Post-test (either 2, 6, or 24 hours later**)
* wanted to know **how lasting were the effects** of negating their stereotypes
* **training** **had an effect** on ppl's associations
75
**Why does ****Altering Implicit Attitudes (****negating stereotypic associations) work?**
1. cognitive effects involving the strengthening and weakening of category-trait associations
2. motivational effects involving the internalization of a motive not to stereotype
3. combo of 1 and 2
76
**Altering Implicit Attitudes Strategy**
**Strengths: **
* direct change
* appears promising
**Weaknesses:**
* intensive & time-consuming
77
**Social Psychology - COPY NOTES FROM BB!!!**
scientific study of how individuals' thoughts, feelings and behaviors are affected by the actual, implied, or imagine presence of others
78
**_ACTUAL_ presence of other people**
* we act differently in the presence of others than we do when alone
* we are affected differently by others based on how we view those others
79
**_IMPLED_ presence of other people**
* social psychologists, the IRS, and the highway patrol depend on an "impled presence" to bring out the best in us
* humans even display items to remind themselves (and others) that we are "in love" and "taken)
80
**_IMAGINED_ presence of other people**
* we can stir our emotions & model good (or bad) behaviors just by thinking about others
* ...Ever been walking alone in the dark and suddenly thought you heard footsteps behind you?
* ...When you were little, did you eat your vegetables because you thought your "hero" did? (A favorite parental trick!)
81
**What is Role-Playing?**
* acting out the **thoughts, feelings and behavior** of another person
* Ex) Zimbardo's Prison Experiment
82
**Role-Playing as Alternative to Deception**
* Typically the experiment is explained to participants in advance and they are asked to behave as they would if the situation were real or did not know purpose of the research
83
**Problems with Role-Play**
**Internal Validity** (can we trust the results are NOT due to distortions of role-playing subjects?)
* Can people really predict how they would behave?
* If familiar situation, can they remember hwo they behaved/felt in the past?
**External Vailidty** (can be generalize these results to actual situations?)
84
**FILM: A Class Divided**
* **Jane Elliot - **3rd grade teacher in predominately European Amer. rural school in Iowa in the 1960s
* for one day, she gave her students first-hand experince with **discrimination** based on eye color
**Hypothesis:**
* Role-playing being the target of discrimination would lead children to become **more tolerant**
85
**Physiological Measures: Attitude Measurement**
**Attitude:** (Gordon Allport, 1935)
* mental or neural state of readiness, organized thru experience, directly influencing one's response to all related objects and situations
86
**Actions and Attitudes**
**Head Movement**
* when peopls listen to messages they agree with, they tend to move their heads vertically (nod) more than horizontally (shake)
**Eye Contact**
* If two people like each other, they will make more eye contact than if they do not like each other
87
**The Lost Letter Technique:
an **_IN_**direct attitude measure**
* Migram "planted" stamped, addressed enveloped in public places - appeared "lost"
* letters were addressed to organizations, ex: UNICEP and Nazi groups
* he thought that if you were more interested in an organization, you would be more likely to put it in the mailbox so that it would be delivered
* Migram wanted to determine relationship between mailing rates (how many people mailed the letters) and organizations the evelopes were addressed to)
* According to Milgram, # of letters received for each organization reflected general attitude of population towards that organization
* **higher mailing rate = more favorable attitude**
* it is only an **aggregate attitude measure**, but esp. useful in environments where attitudes are _suppressed_
88
**Galvanic Skin Response (GSR)**
* drop in the resistance of the skin to the passage of a weak electric current
* usu. measured in the **palm of the hand**
* indicative of **emotion or physiological arousal**
* \*\* **all it measures that their response is NOT neutral (emotional response) or NO response**, CANNOT actually tell if its a negative or positive response
* when pleasant words like 'love' were presented, participants GSRs were greater than to neutral
* same type of responses were seend when unpleasant words like 'rape' were presented to Ps
* when neutral words like 'chair' were presented to Ps, their GSRs remained neutral
89
**Facial Electromyographic Recording (EMG)**
* electrical recording of muscle activity in facial region obtained by placing electrodes on the face
* smile = zygomatic muscles
* frown = corrugator muscles
* used **to detect subtle smiles and frowns**
* pro-attitudinal mesages activate smile muscles where as counter-attitudinal messages activate from muscles
90
**Scaling**
* scaled focus on a **contiuum from very negative to very positive attidues**
91
**A Variety of Scales**
* **Bogardus' Social Distance Scale**
* **Likert's Method of Summated Ratings**
* **Osgood's Semantic Differential**
92
**Bogardus' Social Distance Scale**
* **attitudes towards members of social or ethnic groups**
* based on assumption that one's liking for a group is reflected in the social distance that one finds acceptable in relationships with members of the group
93
**Likert's Method of Summated Ratings**
* **respondents indicate the extent to which they agree or disagree with a statement**
* to ensure scale homogeneity, only items that correlate well with the toal score are kept on the scale
* process of refinement is normally done during the development stage of the scale
94
**Osgood's Semantic Differential**
* **attitude scale**
* includes **various subscales that measure the connotative (implied) meaning of the attitude object**
* **subscales are bipolar**
* this approach is based on the finding that there are **3 elements of meaning** to all concepts:
* **evaluation** (good/bad)
* **potency** (strong/weak)
* **activity** (active/passive)
