Social Approach 2 - Perry et al.

Question 1

When was Perry?

Answer 1

2015

Question 2

What does Perry call personal space?

Answer 2

Interpersonal distance

Question 3

Who first introduced the idea of interpersonal distance in 1996?

Answer 3

Edward T Hall

Question 4

What 4 zones of IPD did Hall create?

Answer 4

Intimate, Personal, Social, Public

Question 5

What hormone does Perry focus on?

Answer 5

Oxytocin (OT)

Question 6

What does OT do?

Answer 6

Helps regulate social thinking and behavior in humans and animals.

Question 7

What is empathy?

Answer 7

The ability of one person to recognise and share the thoughts and feelings of another.

Question 8

What did OT and different empathy levels lead to?

Answer 8

A differential effect.

Question 9

What is an interaction effect?

Answer 9

The joint effect of 2 or more IVs or a DV.

Question 10

What was the aim of the study?

Answer 10

To test the differential effect of the social hormone oxytocin on personal space preference in relation to a person’s empathy ability.

Question 11

Experiment type.

Answer 11

Lab experiment.

Question 12

Where was the experiment?

Answer 12

University of Haifa in Haifa, Israel.

Question 13

Experiment design.

Answer 13

Mixed.
Both experiments used independent measures for the IV of empathy.
Both used repeated measures design for the condition.

Question 14

What was empathy operationalised as?

Answer 14

High or low

Question 15

What was treatment operationalised as?

Answer 15

OT or placebo administered

Question 16

What was the third IV in experiment 1?

Answer 16

Condition
Repeated measures design
Stranger, authority, friend, ball

Question 17

What was the DV?

Answer 17

The personal space requirements of each participant.

Question 18

What was the DV operationalised to in experiment 1?

Answer 18

The preferred distance measured between the participant and the approaching person/object.

Question 19

What was the DV operationalised to in experiment 2?

Answer 19

The preferred distance and angle between two chairs in a room.

Question 20

What was the sample size, age, and gender balance?

Answer 20

54 men
19-32 (mean age 25.29)

Question 21

What did the participants get for participating?

Answer 21

Course credit or money

Question 22

What is the IRI?

Answer 22

Interpersonal Reactivity Index.
A 28-item self-report measure with 4 7-item subscales relating to empathy.

Question 23

What did the High Interpersonal Reactivity Group contain?

Answer 23

20 participants with empathy scores greater than or equal to 40, and a mean age of 23.9.

Question 24

What did the Low Interpersonal Reactivity Group contain?

Answer 24

20 participants with empathy groups lower than 33 and a mean age of 25.9.

Question 25

How much time was there between experiment's 1 and 2?

Answer 25

1 week

Question 26

Did the procedure use a single blind technique?

Answer 26

No, it was double blind.

Question 27

How was the OT administered?

Answer 27

Self-administered through nasal drops of a 250ml bottle of intranasal OT or a placebo saline solution.

Question 28

How was the assessment of empathy done?

Answer 28

Participants completed IRI online after administration of placebo/OT.

Question 29

What did the participants do after they took the IRI?

Answer 29

They were given nature magazines and waited in a quiet room for 45 minutes.

Question 30

Was there counterbalancing?

Answer 30

Yes. Half the participants took OT the first week and saline the second. The other half took saline the first week and OT the second.

Question 31

What was the procedure for experiment 1?

Answer 31

Participants saw a circle on a screen and had to imagine that they were in the center of the circle. Various people/things would move towards them and they had to press the spacebar at the distance they allowed to the person/thing.

Question 32

How many trials were there for experiment 1?

Answer 32

24 for each figure and 96 in total.

Question 33

What was the procedure for experiment 2?

Answer 33

Participants were to choose which room they preferred. The distances between chairs, plants, tables and their angles were changed.

Question 34

What was the experimental condition for experiment 2?

Answer 34

Preferred distance between chairs. It had: 1 - distance between chairs (20-140cm with intervals of 20cm) 2 - angle of chair positions (0*, 45*, 90*)

Question 35

What was the control condition for experiment 2?

Answer 35

Preferred distance between table and plant. It had: 1 - distance between the table and plant (200 - 320cm with intervals of 20cm) 2 - angle of the table and plant positions (0°,45° each or, 90°)

Question 36

How many pairs was each participant shown in experiment 2?

Answer 36

84 repeated twice so 168

Question 37

How long was each pair shown on the screen before participants had to choose?

Answer 37

2 seconds.

Question 38

What does CID stand for?

Answer 38

Comfortable Interpersonal Distance paradigm.

Question 39

What were the results for experiment 1 for the 'condition' IV?

Answer 39

There were differences found between preferred distances for stranger, authority, friend, and ball across all trials.

Question 40

What were the results for the interaction effect 'treatment x empathy'?

Answer 40

High empathy - OT - less personal space Low empathy - OT - more personal space

Question 41

What were the results for the interaction effect 'treatment x condition x empathy'?

Answer 41

Differences appeared for high empathy with OT and placebo.

Question 42

What were the results for experiment 2?

Answer 42

Differences for chair distance but not angles. HE - OT - Less space LE - OT - more space OT and empathy had no effect on table/plant distance.

Question 43

What is a conclusion from Perry?

Answer 43

The administration of OT enhances social cues in opposite ways for people with different empathetic abilities.

Question 44

What is the GRAVE?

Answer 44

MHMMH

Question 45

What are 5 strengths of Perry?

Answer 45

High internal validity Standardised Counterbalanced High reliability High ethics

Question 46

What are 3 weaknesses?

Answer 46

Low ecological validity and mundane realism Low generalisability Ethics - deception