Study Design
Both studies, I recruited = 100.
84 retained For the Baseball Study (after manipulation and attention
checks; I recruited participants who indicated that they watched
Baseball).
73 retained For the Hockey Study (after manipulation and attention
checkss; I recruited participants who indicated that they watched
Hockey).
Steps across BOTH studies
- I asked participants to provide the name of a team that “you root
for regularly”.
- I then asked them to provide the name of the team’s primary
rival.
- Then, I presented the manipulation.
- Finally, I presented the DVs.
Manipulations
Retaliatory Incivility
Baseball
Imagine that your baseball team, the Home Team, are playing the Away Team.
During the course of the game, the pitcher for the Away Team intentionally throws a fastball at one of the star hitters on the Home Team, breaking his elbow and possibly ruining his career.
In retaliation, the next inning, the Home Team’s pitcher decides to hit one of the Away Team’s star batters in the leg. This causes serious bruising, but no permanent damage.
Hockey
Imagine that your hockey team, the Home Team, are playing the Away Team.
During the course of the game, a player on the Away Team takes multiple strides to gain speed to hit a player on the Home Team, and leaves his feet to make contact with the Home Team’ player.
Another player on the Home Team sees this and punches the player on the Away Team in retaliation. The two begin fighting.
Uninstigated Incivility
Baseball
Imagine that your baseball team, the Home Team, are playing the Away Team.
During the course of the game, the Home Team’s pitcher decides to hit one of the Away Team’s star batters in the leg. This causes serious bruising, but no permanent damage.
Hockey
Imagine that your hockey team, the Home Team, are playing the Away Team.
During the course of the game, a player on the Home Team punches a player on the Away Team. The two begin fighting.
Measures used throughout
Virtuous Violence
Adapted from: Rai, T. S., & Fiske, A. P. (2011). Moral psychology
is relationship regulation: moral motives for unity, hierarchy,
equality, and proportionality. Psychological review, 118(1), 57.
Note, I amended this based on how they described virtuous
violence.
- right.
- just.
- fair.
- honorable.
- pure.
- virtuous.
Status Conferral
Adapted from: Jachimowicz, J. M., To, C., Agasi, S., Côté, S., & Galinsky, A. D. (2019). The gravitational pull of expressing passion: When and how expressing passion elicits status conferral and support from others. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 153, 41-62.
Note: In some studies I measured this on two different scales. I
wanted to see if people will report that the amount of status they
confer actually increases (relative to decreasing), compared to
reporting that they don’t admire someone more (which is how it is
usually measured). The question stems are slightly different (for
rel_status, I don’t specify “more” in the items). The two scales are
below:
[pos_status]: 1 (Strongly Disagree) –> 7 (Strongly
Agree).
[rel_status]: -3 (Greatly Decreased) –> 7 (Greatly
Increased).
- I admire them more.
- I hold them in higher esteem.
- I hold them in higher status.
- I respect them more.
Baseball N per condition
##
## init_uncivil ret_uncivil
## 37 47Hockey N per condition
##
## init_uncivil ret_uncivil
## 23 50Analyses
Virtuous Violence
Baseball
Main Effects
##
## Welch Two Sample t-test
##
## data: v_vio by cond
## t = -4.5695, df = 81.785, p-value = 1.712e-05
## alternative hypothesis: true difference in means between group init_uncivil and group ret_uncivil is not equal to 0
## 95 percent confidence interval:
## -2.2818070 -0.8976065
## sample estimates:
## mean in group init_uncivil mean in group ret_uncivil
## 2.128378 3.718085Effect Size and Power
##
## Two-sample t test power calculation
##
## n = 37
## d = 0.9702656
## sig.level = 0.05
## power = 0.9844984
## alternative = two.sided
##
## NOTE: n is number in *each* group
Hockey
Main Effects
##
## Welch Two Sample t-test
##
## data: v_vio by cond
## t = -7.5869, df = 39.245, p-value = 3.265e-09
## alternative hypothesis: true difference in means between group init_uncivil and group ret_uncivil is not equal to 0
## 95 percent confidence interval:
## -3.357319 -1.944202
## sample estimates:
## mean in group init_uncivil mean in group ret_uncivil
## 2.396739 5.047500Effect Size and Power
##
## Two-sample t test power calculation
##
## n = 23
## d = 1.983306
## sig.level = 0.05
## power = 0.999998
## alternative = two.sided
##
## NOTE: n is number in *each* group
Relative Status Conferral
Baseball
Main Effects
##
## Welch Two Sample t-test
##
## data: rel_status by cond
## t = -1.8409, df = 81.178, p-value = 0.06929
## alternative hypothesis: true difference in means between group init_uncivil and group ret_uncivil is not equal to 0
## 95 percent confidence interval:
## -1.38080031 0.05360077
## sample estimates:
## mean in group init_uncivil mean in group ret_uncivil
## -0.668918919 -0.005319149Effect Size and Power
##
## Two-sample t test power calculation
##
## n = 37
## d = 0.3977975
## sig.level = 0.05
## power = 0.3930225
## alternative = two.sided
##
## NOTE: n is number in *each* group
#### Mediation
##
## Mediation/Moderation Analysis
## Call: psych::mediate(y = rel_status ~ cond_num + (v_vio), data = baseball_p1_clean)
##
## The DV (Y) was rel_status . The IV (X) was cond_num . The mediating variable(s) = v_vio .
##
## Total effect(c) of cond_num on rel_status = 0.66 S.E. = 0.37 t = 1.81 df= 82 with p = 0.074
## Direct effect (c') of cond_num on rel_status removing v_vio = -0.6 S.E. = 0.26 t = -2.31 df= 81 with p = 0.023
## Indirect effect (ab) of cond_num on rel_status through v_vio = 1.26
## Mean bootstrapped indirect effect = 1.26 with standard error = 0.31 Lower CI = 0.66 Upper CI = 1.87
## R = 0.79 R2 = 0.62 F = 66.24 on 2 and 81 DF p-value: 9.74e-22
##
## To see the longer output, specify short = FALSE in the print statement or ask for the summaryHockey
Main Effects
##
## Welch Two Sample t-test
##
## data: rel_status by cond
## t = -5.2757, df = 37.035, p-value = 5.987e-06
## alternative hypothesis: true difference in means between group init_uncivil and group ret_uncivil is not equal to 0
## 95 percent confidence interval:
## -2.462107 -1.095719
## sample estimates:
## mean in group init_uncivil mean in group ret_uncivil
## -0.423913 1.355000Effect Size and Power
##
## Two-sample t test power calculation
##
## n = 23
## d = 1.41516
## sig.level = 0.05
## power = 0.9968526
## alternative = two.sided
##
## NOTE: n is number in *each* group
Mediation
##
## Mediation/Moderation Analysis
## Call: psych::mediate(y = rel_status ~ cond_num + (v_vio), data = hockey_p1_clean)
##
## The DV (Y) was rel_status . The IV (X) was cond_num . The mediating variable(s) = v_vio .
##
## Total effect(c) of cond_num on rel_status = 1.78 S.E. = 0.32 t = 5.62 df= 71 with p = 3.5e-07
## Direct effect (c') of cond_num on rel_status removing v_vio = -0.04 S.E. = 0.3 t = -0.14 df= 70 with p = 0.89
## Indirect effect (ab) of cond_num on rel_status through v_vio = 1.82
## Mean bootstrapped indirect effect = 1.79 with standard error = 0.3 Lower CI = 1.23 Upper CI = 2.41
## R = 0.82 R2 = 0.68 F = 73.25 on 2 and 70 DF p-value: 1.51e-21
##
## To see the longer output, specify short = FALSE in the print statement or ask for the summaryPositive Status Conferral
Baseball
##
## Welch Two Sample t-test
##
## data: pos_status by cond
## t = -2.7164, df = 81.243, p-value = 0.008062
## alternative hypothesis: true difference in means between group init_uncivil and group ret_uncivil is not equal to 0
## 95 percent confidence interval:
## -1.8320660 -0.2829426
## sample estimates:
## mean in group init_uncivil mean in group ret_uncivil
## 2.479730 3.537234Effect Size and Power
##
## Two-sample t test power calculation
##
## n = 37
## d = 0.5866863
## sig.level = 0.05
## power = 0.7018409
## alternative = two.sided
##
## NOTE: n is number in *each* group
Mediation
##
## Mediation/Moderation Analysis
## Call: psych::mediate(y = pos_status ~ cond_num + (v_vio), data = baseball_p1_clean)
##
## The DV (Y) was pos_status . The IV (X) was cond_num . The mediating variable(s) = v_vio .
##
## Total effect(c) of cond_num on pos_status = 1.06 S.E. = 0.4 t = 2.67 df= 82 with p = 0.0092
## Direct effect (c') of cond_num on pos_status removing v_vio = -0.35 S.E. = 0.26 t = -1.34 df= 81 with p = 0.18
## Indirect effect (ab) of cond_num on pos_status through v_vio = 1.41
## Mean bootstrapped indirect effect = 1.41 with standard error = 0.33 Lower CI = 0.79 Upper CI = 2.08
## R = 0.82 R2 = 0.68 F = 84.91 on 2 and 81 DF p-value: 6.21e-25
##
## To see the longer output, specify short = FALSE in the print statement or ask for the summaryHockey
Main Effects
##
## Welch Two Sample t-test
##
## data: pos_status by cond
## t = -6.0755, df = 35.833, p-value = 5.61e-07
## alternative hypothesis: true difference in means between group init_uncivil and group ret_uncivil is not equal to 0
## 95 percent confidence interval:
## -3.399051 -1.697470
## sample estimates:
## mean in group init_uncivil mean in group ret_uncivil
## 2.521739 5.070000Effect Size and Power
##
## Two-sample t test power calculation
##
## n = 23
## d = 1.654786
## sig.level = 0.05
## power = 0.9997889
## alternative = two.sided
##
## NOTE: n is number in *each* group
Mediation
##
## Mediation/Moderation Analysis
## Call: psych::mediate(y = pos_status ~ cond_num + (v_vio), data = hockey_p1_clean)
##
## The DV (Y) was pos_status . The IV (X) was cond_num . The mediating variable(s) = v_vio .
##
## Total effect(c) of cond_num on pos_status = 2.55 S.E. = 0.39 t = 6.57 df= 71 with p = 7.2e-09
## Direct effect (c') of cond_num on pos_status removing v_vio = 0.32 S.E. = 0.37 t = 0.88 df= 70 with p = 0.38
## Indirect effect (ab) of cond_num on pos_status through v_vio = 2.23
## Mean bootstrapped indirect effect = 2.2 with standard error = 0.33 Lower CI = 1.55 Upper CI = 2.89
## R = 0.84 R2 = 0.71 F = 85.03 on 2 and 70 DF p-value: 2.73e-23
##
## To see the longer output, specify short = FALSE in the print statement or ask for the summary