Statistical Designs & Analyses -- Likely Schedule of Class Events for Exam #1

University of Nebraska – Lincoln

The relationship of situated social cognition factors and consent to search perceptions in innocent suspects

Sample

The sample was drawn from a pool of undergraduate students enrolled in psychology courses at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. The study was approximately one and a half hours in length and students earned research credit toward fulfilling requirements in their courses. As previously stated, because such a large majority of participants consented to the search, those who did not consent were excluded from the analyses. A similar percentage of participants did not cheat; likewise, those who cheated were removed from the analyses, leaving only the innocent participants. The resultant filtered sample was comprised of 277 undergraduates with ages ranging from 18 to 24 (mean = 19.74 years, SD = 1.29). The sample was predominately Caucasian (77.98%) and female (72.92%).

Materials

Numerous scales, questionnaires, and physical items were used in the study. The study description asked participants to bring items from home (a pair of socks, house/apartment/dorm key, something from the kitchen, and a book, magazine, or something similar) under the pretext that they were participating in a study on juror decision-making and feelings of being at home. An informed consent form, two videos of a trial simulation, a Personal and Home questionnaire, a 20-question memory quiz over the trial videos, a demographic questionnaire, and an Incident Report Form (with details about the search request and the participant’s perceptions of it) were also used in the study. The trial simulations and Personal and Home questionnaire were created to aid in the cover story of examining the effects of home priming on juror decision-making. The study took place in two different rooms, one small and one large. A desk lamp and various light bulbs manipulated the amount of light in the room to be “lit” or “dark.”

Procedure

Participants were asked to meet a research assistant (RA1) outside of the laboratory. RA1 took the participant to the randomly assigned experimental room (small/large and lit/dark). Upon acquisition of consent, RA1 stepped outside while the participant completed the demographic questionnaire. The participant retrieved RA1 to begin the first trial video.

After the first video finished, the participant again retrieved RA1 to start them on the Personal and Home questionnaire, with a quiz over the trial video questions on the back of the document. This questionnaire contained very personal questions, designed so participants would be less willing to allow their belongings to be searched. Before the participant graded the quiz, RA1 explained that if they got all 20 of the quiz questions correct, they would receive entry into a lottery of their choosing for one extra research credit or a $50 gift card. RA1 gave the participant the answer key and left them to grade their own quiz and enter the number correct into the computer, before putting the quiz in their bag to take home. The computer prompted the participant to get RA1 again to start the second video.

RA1 alerted RA2 that the participant was watching the second video, so RA2 could enter the study room upon its completion. RA2 explained to the participant that they were the research assistant in charge of the lottery and there was evidence of cheating in the study. RA2 asked the participant if they cheated on the quiz and inflated their score, presumably to attain entry into the lottery. Then, RA2 stated they and the professor had decided a full search of the room and the participant’s belongings was necessary and asked for consent to the search. RA2 retrieved the Incident Report Form (IRF) from the lab and gave the participant instructions to complete it, then left the room so the participant could fill it out. When the participant finished the IRF, RA2 took it back to the lab and sent RA1 to debrief the participant and grant them a lottery entry. All participants were eligible for the lottery, regardless of prior statements.