Afsha Manual

Manual
Paper VIII
Practicals in Cognitive Processes and Psychological
Testing
for
TYBA
Six Papers in Psychology
2020-21 to 2024-25
Contribution from
Dr. Neeta Tatke

Dr. Neeta Mehta
Dr. Radhika Mohan
Ms. Aarohi Khar
Ms. Shama Todurkar
Dr. Pooja Joshi
Ms. Ruta Patwardhan
Ms. Madhura Londhe
2
PREFACE
T.Y.B.A. lays a solid foundation for the students of Psychology. Amongst the various papers, this
paper – Practicals in Cognitive Processes and Psychological Testing, has a more applied and hands-
on approach compared to the more theoretical content of other papers. This paper aims to
provide the students a glimpse of what researchers and practitioners in the field do and introduce
them to the rigor and discipline that make Psychology a science. It also aims to build skills like
rapport building, questioning, observing and collecting, analyzing and interpreting data.
This manual aims to familiarize students with conducting experiments, administering tests and
giving feedback to participants. It would also help students understand the process of research
through various exercises on identifying variables, designing experiments/research situations, and
reviewing a research paper. The manual also provides guidance for reporting the results of
statistical tests, interpreting findings and writing report in the APA format. This manual will help
students understand the structure of experiments, steps of administrating psychological tests and
writing report of the same. This manual will help in bringing about uniformity in the entire process
of conducting experiments across the colleges.
We would like to thank Dr. Aninha Lobo and Dr. Nandini Diwan who have been authoring the
laboratory manual and workbook since 1996. These Manuals and Workbooks ensured uniformity
in preparing the material and the entire process of conducting an experiment. It also later helped
in giving a structure to the examination process. The checklists of experiments prepared by them
helped in making evaluation of students uniform and objective. The framework provided by their
writing has been a support for the current manual. We acknowledge the importance of their
contribution and are immensely grateful for the same.
We hope the manual serves as a good starting point for students and a guide for teachers in
understanding the process of practicals in Psychology.
Dr. Neeta Tatke Dr. Radhika Mohan
;
3
Index
Sn Content Page No.
1 Preface 2
2 Syllabus 4-6
Semester V
A. Introduction to Experimental Psychology and Statistics in 7
Psychological Research
1 Variables – Types, Operational definition 7
2 Designs – Types (one IV and two IV), Sampling, Randomization and 7
Counterbalancing
3 Hypotheses – Types – Null and Alternative 7
4 Statistical Analysis –Inferential statistics - t test, F Test, statistical 7
significance
5 Scales of Measurement - Introduction and Exercises 8 - 10
6 Report writing – APA format 11
B Practice Exercises – Two exercises 12
1 Experimental Situation given – Effect of Exercise on Immune Functioning 12
2 Variables given – Consumption of food (Nutritious vs Junk) on aggressive 12
behaviour in middle childhood
C Practice Experiment – Anchoring and Adjustment Effect 13 - 14
D Two Experiments in Cognitive Processes 15 - 38
1 The Automatic Vigilance Experiment 15 - 24
The Automatic Vigilance Experiment – Checklists 25 - 26
2 False memory using the Roediger and McDermott paradigm 27 - 34
False memory using the Roediger and McDermott paradigm - Checklists 35 - 38
E One Psychological Test 39 - 51
Administration of Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale and Oxford Happiness 39 - 51
Questionnaire and Calculations of Reliability and Validity Coefficients
4
Paper VIII: Practicals in Cognitive Processes and Psychological Testing
Code Sem Course Title Credits Marks

UAPS505 5 Practicals in Cognitive processes and psychological Testing: Part I 4 100
UAPS605 6 Practicals in Cognitive processes and psychological Testing : Part II 4 100
Learning Objectives-
To facilitate the understanding of theoretical concepts of experimental psychology through
experiential learning, learn the processes involved in scientific inquiry, develop critical approach and
understand use of statistical analysis in psychological research by
a) Introducing the students to Practicals in Cognitive Processes and Psychological Testing: through
practice and conduct of experiments, use of statistical analysis, interpretation and discussion of
data, using APA format for report writing.
b) Introducing the students to Psychological Testing: administration, scoring and interpretation of
the psychological tests, understanding the concepts of reliability and validity and nuances of
procedures and ethical issues.
c) Orienting the students to computer-based experiments (Coglab) and sensitize them to
methodological issues, strengths and limitations of use of computers for conducting
experiments in psychology.
d) Helping students develop skills for evaluation of a research paper and write a research report.
Semester 5
Part I: Practicals in Cognitive Processes and Psychological Testing (Credits =4) (6 lectures
per week per Batch of 8 students)
A. Introduction to Experimental Psychology and Statistics in Psychological Research
1. Variables – Types, Operational definition
2. Designs – Types (one IV and two IV), Sampling, Randomization and Counterbalancing
3. Hypotheses – Types – Null and Alternative
4. Statistical Analysis –Inferential statistics - t test, F Test, statistical significance
5. Introduction to Scales of Measurement
6. Report writing – APA format
B. Practice Exercises – Two exercises
1. Experimental Situation given – Discuss design, hypothesis, IV, DV, Control Variables,
Statistical Analysis, Ethical Issues.
2. Variables given – Design experiment, frame hypothesis, discuss Statistical Analysis,
Ethical Issues.
C. Practice Experiment – One
1. Conduct the experiment
2. Review Original Article
3. Write result and discussion of group data using APA format
D. Two Experiments in Cognitive Processes
1. Conduct the experiments
2. Pool group data
3. Use appropriate statistics
4. Write report – abstract, introduction, method, result (Individual and group), discussion,
conclusion
5
E. One Psychological Test

1. Administration, Scoring and Interpretation of the Test
2. Writing report on the findings of the test
3. Calculate Reliability / Validity of the test
Part II: Practicals in Cognitive Processes and Psychological Testing (Credits =4) (6 lectures per
week per Batch of 8 students)

1 Designs - Complex (Mixed)
2. Statistical Analysis – Inferential statistics – ANOVA, Chi Square
B. Review a research paper
C. Two Experiments in Cognitive Processes
2. Pool group data
conclusion
D. One Psychological Test
1. Conducting and debriefing
2. Write report
E. One Computer-based Experiment (Coglab)
F. Use of Excel
1. Introduction to Excel
2. Statistical Analysis of both the experiments
Learning Outcomes –
After studying this paper, students will able to…
1. Translate theoretical concepts into application-based experiments.
2. Conduct experiments following standardized procedure.
3. Apply statistical tests and analyze the data collected.
4. Write reports on research conducted using APA format.
5. Make sense of the research papers on any given topic
Distribution of Marks
Internal 40 marks Practical examination of 2 hours 60 marks
Distribution of Marks
Internal marks
1 Checklist for Instructions 10
2 Checklist for Conduct 10
3 Report Writing 10
4 Attendance 05
5 Journal 05
Examination Practical
Instructions, Conduct, report 40
Viva 20
6
The teacher has to give marks for each report. The final marks will be the average marks obtained
for each point as mentioned above.
During Examination, there will be checklists for Instructions, Conduct and report. In viva 6
questions of 3 marks and one question of 2 marks will be asked.
Books for reference

1) Anastasi, A. & Urbina, S. (1997). Psychological Testing. (7th ed.). Pearson Education, New
Delhi, first Indian reprint 2002
2) Aaron, A., Aaron, E. N., & Coups, E. J. (2006). Statistics for Psychology. (4th ed.). Pearson
Education, Indian reprint 2007
3) Cohen, J. R., & Swerdlik, M. E., (2018). Psychological Testing and Assessment: An introduction
to Tests and Measurement. (9th ed.). New York. McGraw-Hill International edition. (Indian
reprint 2018)
4) Elmes, D.G., Kantowitz, B.H., & Roediger, H.L. (1999) Research Methods in Psychology.(6th
ed.). Brooks/Cole, Thomson Learning
5) Francis, G., Neath, I., &VanHorn, D. (2008). Coglab 2.0 on a CD. Wadsworth Cengage
Learning, International student edition
6) Gilhooly, K.; Lyddy,F. & Pollick F. (2014). Cognitive Psychology, McGraw Hill Education
7) Garrett, H.E. (1973). Statistics in Psychology and Education (6th ed.) Bombay: Vakils, Feffer,
and Simons Pvt. Ltd.
8) Guilford, J.P. Fruchter, B. (1973). Fundamental statistics in psychology and education. (5th
ed.) New York: McGraw-Hill
9) Goldstein, E. B. (2005). Cognitive Psychology: Connecting Mind, Research, and Everyday
Experience.Wadsworth/ Thomson Learning
10) Harris, P. (2008). Designing and Reporting Experiments in Psychology. 3rd ed., Open
University Press, McGraw-Hill Education
11) Hollis-Sawyer, L.A., Thornton, G. C. III, Hurd, B., & Condon, M.E. (2009). Exercises in
Psychological Testing. (2nd ed.). Boston: Pearson Education
12) McBurney, D. H. (2001). Research Methods. (5th ed.). Bangalore: Thomson Learning India
13) Mangal, S. K. (1987). Statistics in Psychology and Education. New Delhi: Tata McGraw Hill
Publishing Company Ltd.
14) Martin, D. W. (2004). Doing Psychology Experiments. (6th ed.). Belmont: Thomson
Wadsworth
15) Matlin, M. W. (1995). Cognition. 3rd ed., Bangalore: Prism Books pvt. ltd.
16) King, B. M., Rosopa, P. J., &. Minium, E. W., (2011). Statistical Reasoning in the Behavoiral
sciences,John Wiley & sons
17) Minium, E. W., King, B. M., & Bear, G. (2001). Statistical Reasoning in Psychology and
Education. Singapore: John-Wiley
18) Pareek, U. (2003). Training Instruments in HRD and OD (2nd ed.), Tata McGraw- Hill
Publishing Company, Mumbai
19) Snodgrass, J. G., Levy-Berger G. V., & Haydon, M. (1985). Human Experimental Psychology.
New York: Oxford University Press.
20) Solso, R. L., &McLin, M. K. (2002). Experimental Psychology: A case approach. 7th ed., Allyn
Bacon, Pearson Education New Delhi, Indian reprint 2003
21) Steinberg, W. J. (2008). Statistics Alive! Los Angeles: Sage Publications, Inc.
22) Surprenant, A.M., Francis, G., & Neath, I. (2005). Coglab Reader. Thomson Wadsworth
7

1. Variables – Types, Operational definition
2. Designs – Types (one IV and two IV), Sampling, Randomization and Counterbalancing
3. Hypotheses – Types – Null and Alternative
4. Statistical Analysis –Inferential statistics - t test, F Test, statistical significance
The first four topics in Introduction to Experimental Psychology and Statistics in

Psychological Research are the basic topics, which creates a strong foundation for
this paper of Practicals in Psychology. The conceptual clarity in variables, the
designs, hypotheses and Statistical Analysis gives a sound foundation for
understanding of Psychology as a science.
The teachers are expected to teach these topics in details, using the reference books
at the beginning of the fifth Semester. A Power Point Presentation has been shared
separately to help the teachers reach out to the students effectively, in the online
teaching, during these unusual pandemic times.
8
Scales of measurement
Measurement is the way of assigning numbers or symbols to characteristics of people or things

according to certain rules. Different variables are measured in different ways depending on their
nature. Some variables are continuous i.e., their values can be divided further; for example. height.
Some others are discrete such as those involving categories; for example, Male and Female. They
do not have continuity therefore cannot be divided further.
Scales of measurement refer to ways in which these variables/numbers are defined and categorized.
Each scale of measurement has certain properties that distinguish them from the others. There are
four scales of measurement which are remembered by the acronym ‘NOIR’. Each letter in noir
stands for one scale of measurement in the order of increasingly rigorous scales – Nominal, Ordinal,
Interval and Ratio.
Nominal scales–
Nominal scale is the simplest form of measurement. It involves the classification or categorization
of variables, such that they make mutually exclusive categories. Variables such as gender, religion
etc are measured on the nominal scale.
Ordinal scales -
In addition to categories as in the nominal scale, ordinal scales also involve some ordering of the
categories of the variable. Therefore, variables in the ordinal scale can be compared. For example,
Military ranks.
Interval scales -
Interval scales imply equal intervals between adjacent values of a variable being measured. For
example, Temperature. The difference between 20 and 30 degrees is the same as the difference
between 40 and 50 degrees.
Ratio scales -
Ratio scales are the most informative. Variables measured on the ratio scale have an absolute zero
i.e. the theoretical absence of the variable exists. For example, money. Because of the absence of
the variable, it can also be compared such as 60rs is double the amount of 30rs.
Note – Measurements using the Likert scales, are considered to be ordinal or interval scales. Since
Likert scales involve placing responses into ordered categories, they are generally considered to be
ordinal scales. However, in practice many researchers consider them to be interval scales and
conduct data analysis accordingly. Since it is very frequently used in research, it is important to
consider these factors while choosing the correct statistical methods to be used with Likert scale
data.
Practice exercises -
Sr no. Blood Food IQ Income Socio – Time taken Marks Grades
group preference (per economic to solve a
month) class puzzle (in
secs)
1 O +ve Vegetarian 110 16,000 Lower 398 45 D
2 B +ve Vegan 125 38,000 Middle 423 82 O
3 A -ve Non-vegetarian 98 45,500 Upper 632 60 A
4 O +ve Vegetarian 100 12,500 Lower 524 73 O
5 A +ve Non-vegetarian 105 43,000 Upper 523 55 C
6 A -ve Non-vegetarian 110 28,000 Middle 453 65 A
7 B +ve Vegetarian 80 55,500 Upper 621 48 D
8 O +ve Non-vegetarian 95 37,500 Middle 348 67 A
9 O +ve Vegetarian 86 17,000 Lower 564 53 C
10 B +ve Non-vegetarian 107 28,000 Middle 537 62 A
11 A +ve Non-vegetarian 118 50,000 Upper 600 90 O
12 O +ve Vegetarian 126 9,500 Lower 486 55 B
13 B +ve Non-vegetarian 107 30,500 Middle 384 70 O
9
14 A +ve Vegetarian 110 20,000 Lower 547 58 B

15 O +ve Vegan 93 25,000 Middle 435 92 O
In every experiment or research, a variable would be measured i.e. the dependent variable. The
kind of descriptive and inferential analysis done with the variable depends on how it is measured.
The different ways in which variables are measured are known as scales of measurement. Each
scale of measurement has certain features, which determine what analysis can be done.
Scale of Graphical representation Measures of central Inferential statistics

measurement tendency
Nominal Pie chart, Bar graph Mode Chi square
Ordinal Bar graph Median Chi square
Interval Histogram, bar graphs, line Mean, Median, Mode t test, ANOVA
graphs
Ratio Histogram, bar graphs, line Mean, Median, Mode t test, ANOVA
graphs
Calculations – (sample data tables)

Nominal data –
Blood group Frequency Food preference Frequency

O +ve Vegetarian
B +ve Non vegetarian
A +ve Vegan
A –ve
Ordinal data –
Socio economic class – 1 = Upper, 2= Middle, 3 = Lower
Grades – 1 = O, 2 = A, 3 = B, 4 = C, 5 = D.
Variable Data Median Rank

Socio economic class
Grades
Interval scale –
Sr. no. IQ scores Marks

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
10
14
15
Total
Mean
Median
Mode
Range
SD
Variance
Ratio scale –
Person Income (per month) Time taken to solve a puzzle (in

secs)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Total
Mean
Median
Mode
Range
SD
Variance
References –
Huiping Wu & Shing-On Leung (2017) Can Likert Scales be Treated as Interval Scales? A Simulation
Study, Journal of Social Service Research
Basu Prasad Subedi (2016) Using Likert Type Data in Social Science Research: Confusion, Issues
and Challenges, International Journal of Contemporary Applied Sciences.
Online Statistics Education: A Multimedia Course of Study (http://onlinestatbook.com/)
Cohen, J. R, Swerdlik, M.E, Struman, E.D. (2015). Psychological Testing and Assessment: An
Introduction to tests and measurement.
Food
Blood group Frequency preference Frequency
O +ve 6 Vegetarian 6
Non
B +ve 4 vegetarian 7
A +ve 3 Vegan 2
A –ve 3
Ordinal data –
Socio economic class – 1 = Upper, 2= Middle, 3 = Lower
Grades – 1 = O, 2 = A, 3 = B, 4 = C, 5 = D.
Variable Data Median Rank
Socio
economic 1,1,1,1,2,2,2,2
class ,2,2,3,3,3,3,3 8
1,1,1,1,1,2,2,2
Grades ,2,3,3,4,4,5,5 8
Interval scale –
Sr. no. IQ scores Marks
1 110 45
2 125 82
3 98 60
4 100 73
5 105 55
6 110 65
7 80 48
8 95 67
9 86 53
10 107 62
11 118 90
12 126 55
13 107 70
14 110 58
15 93 92
Total 1570 975
Mean 104.67 65
Median 107 62
Mode 110 55
Range 46 47
SD 12.63 13.79
Variance 159.68 190.13
Ratio scale –
Time taken to
Income (per solve a puzzle
Person month) (in secs)
1 16,000 398
2 38,000 423
3 45,500 632
4 12,500 524
5 43,000 523
6 28,000 453
7 55,500 621
8 37,500 348
9 17,000 564
10 28,000 537
11 50,000 600
12 9,500 486
13 30,500 384
14 20,000 547
15 25,000 435
Total 456000 7475
Mean 30400 498.34
Median 28000 523
Mode 28000 -
Range 46000 284
SD 13677.72 85.76
Variance 186806666.7 7355.02
11
5. Report writing – APA format

Some important points from Manual of the American Psychological Association – 5th Edition APA –
Title:
1. It should not be more than 12 words.

2. It should be boldfaced. All the major words and the words longer than 4 letters should be
capitalized (The first letter should be capital).
3. The title should be at the center of the page.
4. Avoid abbreviations – STM, ASPD, avoid using colon.
5. Avoid unnecessary words (like a study of, an experiment on). The title should be focused,
concise and has to identify major variables used in the study.
Abstract:
1. Should not be more than 120 words.

2. It should mention Problem, participants, gender, method, procedure, tools, findings,
significance, conclusion and implications.
Capitalize:
1. First word after full stop and Colon.

2. Do not capitalize laws and theories, for e.g. ‘law of effect’.
3. Capitalize Test/Scale names. Do not capitalize if used in generic terms – for e.g. stroop test
was used
4. In references, only the first word is capital, all others are small
Italics:
1. Titles of books, periodicals, microfilms.

2. Species and their varieties.
3. New, technical key terms (only first time).
4. Periodical’s volume number in references.
Numbers:
1. All numbers from zero to nine should be written in words, for e.g., two, six
2. All numbers from 10 and above should be written numerically, for e.g., 12, 200
3. When comparison is stated, for e.g., in 5th & 10th trial, and for time, date, ratio, percentiles
– use number, even when it is between o and 9.
12
B. Practice Exercises – Two exercises
1. A sample Experimental Situation is given below,
An experiment was conducted to study the effect of exercise on improvement of immune

functioning. The immune functioning was measured using a 5-point rating scale, in terms of health
complaints – constant feeling of fatigue, frequent cold, body aches and pain, health complaints. One
group practiced various Yoga postures, 5 days a week for 40 minutes, for three months, under the
guidance of a teacher. The other group was no exercise group. The participants were equated on
few important variables as age, gender, socioeconomic level and pretest immune functioning. The
pre and post-test measures of immune function on rating scale were compared.
Discuss the possible designs, both the null and alternative hypothesis, IV, DV, Control Variables,
Statistical Analysis and Ethical Issues.
2. A sample set of Variables is given below,
Consumption of food (Nutritious vs Junk) on aggressive behavior in middle childhood

- State IV, DV, CV
- Define operationally IV, DV
- Design experiment, state the strengths & flaws of the design
- Frame Null & alternate hypothesis
- State the statistical analysis
- Discuss ethical issues
Design an experiment, frame both the null and alternative hypothesis, discuss the Statistical
Analysis and Ethical Issues
The Practice Exercises are to be conducted batchwise, under the guidance of the teacher.
The students will discuss both the sets of exercises batchwise and each student will write a small
report based on the discussion, with possible strengths and limitations of the design and other
aspects discussed.
Hoorain Ansari TYBA 19003
Practise experiment 1
Non-Directional hypotheses:
Alternative- There will be a difference in improvement in immune functioning due to exercising,
i.e. the difference scores from immune functioning scale before and after the “doing yoga”
condition would be different from difference scores from immune functioning scale before and
after the “not doing yoga” condition
Null- There will be no difference in improvement in immune functioning due to exercising, i.e.
the difference scores from immune functioning scale before and after the “doing yoga” condition
would not be different from the difference scores from immune functioning scale before and
after the “not doing yoga” condition
Directional hypotheses:
Alternative- Improvement in immune functioning would be higher due to exercising, i.e. the
difference scores from immune functioning scale before and after the “doing yoga” condition
would be higher than difference scores from immune functioning scale before and after the “not
doing yoga” condition
Null- There will be no difference in improvement in immune functioning due to exercising, i.e.
the difference scores from immune functioning scale before and after the “doing yoga” condition
would be equal to or lower than immune functioning scale before and after the “not doing yoga”
condition
Independent Variable-
The independent variable was “exercise”.
Theoretical definition. The variable can be defined as behaviors where the body is deliberately
put under tolerable amount of stress, generally using the limbs of the body.
Operational definition. Exercise was operationalized in the form of doing yoga. There were two
levels of the variable in its operationalization. One level was “doing yoga” where participants
practiced yoga for 5 days a week, 40 minutes each day, over a span of three months.The other
level was “not doing yoga”, where participants did not engage in any yoga-related activities
during the three-month period.
Dependent Variable-
The independent variable in this experiment was “improvement of immune functioning”.
Theoretical definition. The variable can be defined as the extent to which there is an increase in
the ability of the body to defend itself against pathogens.
Operational definition. It was operationalized using difference scores on an immunity scale from
before and after experimental treatments. The immunity scale consisted of items listing various
health complaints and a 5-point rating scale on which the responders would indicate the extent of
their experience of the symptoms at the time of responding.
Control Variables:
1. Gender. Norms in society on characteristics related to being male or female. The variable
was operationalized as asking the participant to state their gender in a form. The control
was executed by keeping the proportion of all genders equal in both groups.
2. Age. Time elapsed between birth and a given point in time. The variable was
operationalized as asking the participant to state their age in terms of number of years in a
form. The control was executed by having participants from only one age group.
3. Socioeconomic level. Membership of participants to various sociocultural groups and
economic strata.The variable was operationalized as asking the participant to state their
mother tongue, religion and monthly income in a form. The control was executed by
keeping the proportion of all socioeconomic categories equal in both groups.
4. Pretest immune functioning. The ability of the body to defend itself against pathogens
before the experimental treatment. It was operationalized on an immunity scale from
before experimental treatments. The immunity scale consisted of items listing various
health complaints and a 5-point rating scale on which the responders would indicate the
extent of their experience of the symptoms at the time of responding. The control was
executed by ensuring the immunity functioning of all participants was similar before the
experiment.
Confounding variables
1. Other forms of exercise. Exercise which is not yoga. The variable would be
operationalized through response of the participants on a questionnaire after the
experiment to a question asking them if they engaged in any other forms of physical
exercise regularly over the last three months such as running, stretching, sports, etc. The
variable would confound the experiment because it may change immune functioning
through means that the experimenter did not intend to study.
2. Injury. Damage caused to part(s) of the body which impairs its functioning. The variable
would be operationalized using reports by the participant and observation by the
experimenter of any damage that would be caused to the body due to experimental
treatment. It may bias the immune functioning to a lower level.
3. Absenteeism. Frequency of not appearing for the completion of a task/ event. The
variable would be operationalized as the number of times a participant did not come for
the “doing yoga” treatment. The duration of exposure to the experimental treatment may
be less than the rest of the sample and may bias the group statistics.
Experimental Design- The experiment uses a random measures design. In a random measures
design, participants are randomly assigned groups, and only one level of the independent
variable is induced into each group. For the given experiment, participants were randomly
assigned to two groups- one group was exposed to only the “doing yoga” level of the
independent variable, and the other group was exposed to only the “not doing yoga” level of the
independent variable.
Advantages of Random Groups Design

1. There is no interference between various levels of independent variables.
2. A larger sample size is used, thus more accurate estimations.
3. Participants’ performance is not affected on tasks for measuring dependent
variables since they do it only once, thus there is no effect of practice or fatigue.
Disadvantages of Random Group Design

1. There is more accumulation of individual errors.
2. Less realistic since no one is exposed to only one level of independent variable in real
life.
3. Confounding during experimental procedure may be different in each group which makes
it difficult to account for it.
Statistical Analysis: The experiment uses a random groups design, with one independent
variable with two levels and one dependent variable. Since there are two independent samples
giving us measures from only one dependent variable, an independent samples t-test would be
appropriate for use.
Ethical Issues:
1. Participants may feel anxiety to follow their commitment once they volunteer to
participate for the three months duration
2. Participants who do not have the physique to follow all the yoga routines may experience
body image issues
3. There could be injuries such as sprains or some other muscular injury while doing yoga.
4. If the participant has a history of engaging in a different exercise routine, there is a
potential for a relative decrease in immunity functioning due to yoga.
5. If there is a type I error in the results, participants may practice yoga with unattainable
expectations of improved immune functioning.
Practice experiment 2-
Directional hypotheses:
Alternative hypothesis - Nutritious food will lower aggressive behaviour, i.e the mean score of
the group which ate junk food to test aggression will be higher than the group which ate
nutritional food.
Null hypothesis - Nutritious food will not lower aggressive behaviour, i.e the mean score of the
group which ate junk food to test aggression will not be higher than the group which ate
nutritional food.
Non-directional hypotheses:
Alternative hypothesis - Consumption of type of food will have an effect on levels of aggression,
i.e. the scores to test aggression of the group which ate nutritious food will differ from the group
which ate junk food.
Null hypothesis - Consumption of type of food will not have an effect on levels of aggression, i.e.
the scores to test aggression of the group which ate nutritious food will not differ from the group
which ate junk food.
Independent variable - Consumption of food:

Theoretical definition: Type of food consumed.
Operational definition: The food was operationalised on two levels: ‘nutritional food group’ and
‘junk food group’. Participants of one group were provided with nutritious food, i.e. they were
given chapati and vegetables for breakfast, rice and curry for lunch and fruits for dinner, while
the participants of the other group were provided with junk food i.e. burgers or rolls for
breakfast, chips for lunch and pizza for dinner.
Dependant variable- Aggression:

Theoretical definition: Type of behaviour to cause physical or mental harm to self or others.
Operational definition: Aggression was operationalised using a 10-point scale where parents and
students were given a questionnaire to measure aggressiveness after 3 months to measure change
in mood. Participants of one group were provided with nutritious food, i.e. they were given
chapati and vegetables for breakfast, rice and curry for lunch and fruits for dinner, while the
participants of the other group were provided with junk food i.e. burgers or rolls for breakfast,
chips for lunch and pizza for dinner.
Controlled variables-
1. Gender - Category that one identifies with based on social norms pertaining masculinity
and femininity. Participants were asked to indicate their gender identity. Only boy
students were chosen to be participants in the study.
2. Time duration of consumption of food - The length of the period during which food is
being eaten. Number of months during which food was given by the experimenter. A
span of 3 months was taken under observation to measure aggression.
3. Age - Time elapsed between birth and present. Asking participants to indicate, in “years”,
how old they are. Participants of the middle childhood age group i.e. 6 to 12 years of age
were selected for the experiment.
4. Similarity of pre-post test questionnaires - The extent to which the questionnaires in
pre-treatment and post-treatment are the same. Deciding on whether or not to give the
same questionnaire before and after the experimental treatment. The questionnaire given
to students and parents to measure aggressive levels included the same set of questions to
minimise error.
Confounding variables:
1. Sleeping pattern - The amount of sleep a participant gets throughout the assignment.
Participant’s hours of sleep should be recorded. Aggressive levels can be impacted by
different sleeping patterns of the participants.
2. Metabolism - The biochemical process that occurs in living organisms from transforming
food to energy. A test to measure metabolic rate should be conducted. Participants will
have dissimilar levels of metabolism that will react differently to the nutritional or junk
food consumption.
3. Allergies - A medical condition that makes you ill by eating, touching or breathing
something that doesn’t normally make other people ill. Participants should be asked to
list allergies that they know they might have. Participants may or may not have allergies
that would react to the consumption of the types of food given.
4. Socioeconomic status/lifestyle - Socioeconomic status is the social standing or class of an
individual or group. It is often measured as a combination of education, income, and
occupation. Participants can be of lower, middle or upper class socioeconomic status.
Participants will have different lifestyles that may or may not impact aggressive
behaviour.
Experimental design- This experiment is a random measures experiment because each group
participants will receive only one experiment treatment. One group is exposed to ‘consumption
of junk food’ where they are given a nutritious meal condition while the other group is exposed
to ‘consumption of nutritional food’ condition where they are given a meal consisting of junk
food.
Advantages of Random Groups Design:

1. There is no interference between various levels of independent variables.
2. A larger sample size is used, thus more accurate estimations.
3. Participants’ performance is not affected on tasks for measuring dependent variables
since they do it only once, thus there is no effect of practice or fatigue.
Disadvantages of Random Group Design:

1. There is more accumulation of individual errors.
2. Less realistic since no one is exposed to only one level of independent variable in real
life.
3. Confounding during experimental procedure may be different in each group which makes
it difficult to account for it.
Statistical analysis- Because the data comparison is between 2 groups, t-test for independent
groups would be applied to test the hypothesis. The rejection criteria would be 5% to minimise
error.
Ethical issues-
1. Health concerns - Due to the sudden change in staple food of the children, they can be
susceptible to diseases and/or obesity.
2. Consent of children and parents - The student participants and their parents must be debriefed
about the experiment and with their allowance only, the experimenter can continue.
3. Deception and bias from the experimenter - The experimenter must be completely transparent
regarding the procedure participants are about to go through and should be equal to every
participant to minimise experimenter bias.
4. Liberty to withdraw - The participants must be given complete liberty to withdraw at any stage
of the experiment at their will.
13
C. One Practice Experiment

1. Conduct the experiment
2. Review Original Article
3. Write result and discussion of group data using APA format
Practice experiment – Anchoring and Adjustment
For participating in the experiment half of the students in the class should have chits with numbers
1-50 (low anchor) written on them and the other half should have chits with numbers 51-100 (high
anchor) written on them. For conducting the experiment, the class is randomly divided into 2
groups. 1 group leaves the class for around 10 minutes. The teacher conducts the low anchor
condition of the experiment by asking the students 10 questions, the answers to each of which are
expressed in percentages. The students are instructed that after hearing the question, they should
pick a chit (having a number between 1 and 50) , read the number written on it, decide and write
on a sheet of paper 1) whether their estimated answer is higher/lower than or same as the number
on the chit and 2) their actual estimate. After writing down their estimated percentages for each
question, the group leaves the class.
The other group enters the class and the teacher conducts the high anchor condition of the
experiment. The procedure remains the same, the only difference is that the students pick from
chits having numbers between 51 and 100.
Once the conduct for both the conditions is completed, each student has to calculate the mean of
their estimated percentages. The mean estimate of each student is collected and the mean estimate
for the 2 conditions is calculated. Independent samples t-test is conducted to find whether the mean
estimate for the 2 conditions are significantly different. The students discuss the methodological
aspects of the experiment.
Instructions
This is a simple experiment. I will ask you 10 questions one at a time. Your task is to write the answer
to each question as accurately as possible. Before you answer each question, you have to pick out
1 chit, on which a number is written. You have to write whether your answer to the question, which
will be a number, will be higher, lower or same as the number on the chit. Then you have to write
your actual estimate.
Individual Data
Question no. Anchor Estimate high/low Actual estimated no.
1
-
10
Total - -
Mean - -
14
Group Data: Comparison of Mean estimated percentages of 20 students in High and Low Anchor
condition.
Mean estimated percentages
P’s High anchor Low anchor
20
Total
Mean
Questions:
1. On an average, what percentage of typing is done with the left hand?

2. What percentage of the earth’s land is covered by glaciers?
3. What percentage of plant life is found in the ocean?
4. What percentage of bones in the body is located in the feet?
5. What percentage of the world’s spices come from India?
6. What percentage of households in India are single parent families?
7. What percentage of police personnel in India are women?
8. What percentage of the world population consumes rice as staple food?
9. What percentage of their lives do cats spend sleeping?
10. What percentage of the world population lives in Asia?
Low Anchor Group High Anchor Group
Average Average
P Name Estimate SS1 P Name Estimate SS2
1 thegirlwhobakes 36.50 10.368 1 mikasa 43.00 0.004
2 Chugjug 34.70 25.200 2 Era 39.30 14.138
3 Bunny 47.60 62.094 3 Asuna 46.80 13.988
4 Sahil Raj Singh 39.80 0.006 4 Flute 28.60 209.092
5 Stardust 41.22 2.250 5 Shakespeare 40.30 7.618
6 Butterfly 28.60 123.654 6 Lisa 40.60 6.052
7 Falling star 39.89 0.029 7 Hehehe 39.10 15.682
8 India 39.40 0.102 8 TheKarateGirl 66.50 549.434
9 Rose 47.78 64.964 9 Elara Cavanhaugh 42.00 1.124
10 kitkat 43.90 17.472 10 Blair 48.63 31.025
11 Pearl 32.40 53.582 11 Acronvron 43.33 0.073
12 Chubby 28.57 124.323 12 Modiji 34.89 66.749
13 Sana 39.10 0.384 13 Bond 59.40 266.996
14 Gojo Baker [1] 37.38 5.476 14 ÆRCEE 39.44 13.104
15 Kakashi 36.63 9.548 15 amy 39.88 10.112
16 Inej 44.88 26.626 16 Aarti 48.10 25.402
17 tanshi 39.22 0.250 17 Noor 39.63 11.765
18 Stuart 38.25 2.161 18 Blur 35.90 51.266
19 ht 31.25 71.741 19 Pink 41.70 1.850
20 Fardeen khan [2] 56.00 265.038 20 taehyung 44.13 1.145
21 Rachel 51.00 127.238
MEAN 39.72 992.509 MEAN 43.06 1296.614
VAR 49.625 VAR 68.243
Pooled Var 58.69545128
Pooled SD 7.661295666
M2 - M1 3.34
0.3124404705
Samp Dist SD 2.390324248
t 1.398923579
M2 - M1 at p <
0.05 4.05583
Original article:
The article titled ‘Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases’ by Amos Tversky and
Daniel Kahneman published in 1974 described three heuristics that are employed in making
judgments under uncertainty: (i) representativeness, which is usually employed when people are
asked to judge the probability that an object or event A belongs to class or process B; (ii)
availability of instances or scenarios, which is often employed when people are asked to assess
the frequency of a class or the plausibility of a particular development; and (iii) adjustment from
an anchor, which is usually employed in numerical prediction when a relevant value is available.
These heuristics are highly economical and usually effective, but they lead to systematic and
predictable errors. A better understanding of these heuristics and of the biases to which they lead
could improve judgments and decisions in situations of uncertainty.
Results and discussions:

According to the cumulative data of 41 participants in the given table, the difference between the
means of high and low anchor conditions are clearly observed. The average estimate for high
anchor condition equals 43.06 while it is 39.72 for low anchor condition. As there were two
groups with each being exposed to only one level out of two of the IV, the appropriate inferential
statistic used was that of an independent sample t-test. Thus, considering the random measures
design, pooled variance was calculated to get the difference between the two means to achieve
more accurate estimates.The T value was found to be 1.39 however referring to the cut off t-table
at df 39 , critical t-value was found to be 1.697 at 0.05 level of significance. This indicates that
our obtained t value was lower than the critical t-value and hence was not statistically significant
to reject the null hypothesis. The results were deviant from the expected because of the
confounding factors that were at play. Since the medium of instructions being online, there was a
possibility of uncertainty regarding proper understanding and submission of the data due to
technical and network inconveniences. Also, participants might have been exposed to the
opportunity of searching answers online since there was not any strict monitoring. This could've
minimised the effect of given anchors due to the factors discussed above and other unaccounted
ones.
Conclusion
The alternative hypothesis, 'Lower anchor leads to lower estimation than estimation with a
higher anchor' was not validated by the group data as observed by the obtained t- value. t(1.39),
p> 0.05.
15
D. Two Experiments in Cognitive Processes

2. Pool group data
conclusion
A. The Automatic Vigilance Experiment
TITLE: The Automatic Vigilance Experiment
INTRODUCTION
• What is automatic vigilance? Criteria of automatic vigilance
• What is Stroop effect and features of Stroop task (McLeod, 1991) and Variations of Stroop
Task
• Briefly review studies on effect of semantic meaning on automatic vigilance (Wentura and
Rothurmund, 2000). Explain Automatic vigilance hypothesis through stroop colour
interference paradigm
• What are the reasons for interference in colour naming due to desirability value of the
information? Automatic vigilance and valence of the information: desirable versus
undesirable traits- attention grabbing power of negative social information (Pratto and John,
1991)
• Summarize various research studies on automatic vigilance and desirability value of
information.
• Discuss, if any, other relevant research studies on effect of semantic meaning on colour
naming.
• What is the impact of Automatic vigilance on incidental learning and reasons for the
predictions?
• What are the predictions in the experiment and rationale for the hypotheses?
PROBLEM
To study the automatic vigilance towards social information (difference in colour naming time and
number of words recalled) as a function of the valence of the material (positive versus negative)
HYPOTHESES
Alternative Hypotheses
1. Undesirable trait words produce more interference with colour naming than the desirable trait
words. Total time taken to name the colours of undesirable trait words are more than that of
desirable trait words.
2. The undesirable trait words are recalled more than the desirable trait words.
Null Hypotheses
1. Undesirable trait words do not produce more interference with colour naming more than
the desirable trait words. Total time taken to name the colours of undesirable trait words is
less than or equal to that of desirable trait words.
2. The undesirable trait words are recalled less than or equal to the desirable trait words.
16
OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS OF THE VARIABLES:

Independent Variable
Desirability value of the information -1 Independent Variable with 2 levels.
Presentation of (i) Undesirable trait words and (ii) Desirable trait words in the colours: Red, Green,
Blue, Pink, Orange and Brown.
Dependent Variables
1. Total time taken (in seconds) to name the colours of desirable and undesirable trait words.
2. Total number of desirable and undesirable trait words recalled.
Note: The number of errors made while naming the colours can be noted down and discussed in
ancillary observations of the individual data
Control Variables
1. There were separate colour-word sheets for the two conditions, desirable and undesirable trait
words. Each sheet had 30 desirable/undesirable trait words and 06 neutral words repeated
twice.
2. The two sheets were presented successively. Half of the Es in the class presented the desirable
trait words sheet first followed by the undesirable trait words sheet. The other half of the Es
used the reverse order of presentation.
3. The first and the last column of both the sheets had neutral words, to avoid primacy and recency
effects while recalling the desirable and undesirable trait words in the free recall task.
4. No mention of the recall test was made during the initial colour naming task.
5. The order of the colours to be named in both the conditions was the same.
6. The order of the colours was random with the constraint that each colour occurred once in each
column and twice in each row.
7. The sheets of the stimulus words for the two conditions were comparable in the arrangement
and spacing of the colour-word units and in the number of letters comprising each unit.
8. There was an unfilled interval of 30 seconds between the presentations of the two successive
cards.
METHOD:
Participants:
Individual Data
Name (Optional) Age Class Emotional State

Participant 1
Group Data
College Students: N=20 participants
Apparatus and Materials

1. Two separate colour-word sheets, for the two conditions: desirable colour-word units and
undesirable colour-word units, each containing 72 colour-word units in lower-case letters.
(6 colour-word units in each column and 12 colour-word units in each row).
2. Two scoring sheets for the colour naming task.
3. One demonstration card with 2 columns of 6 units each having the word ‘example’ written
in all the different colours that will be used in the actual task.
4. A recall sheet for the recall test.
5. Stopwatch
17
6. Stationery
7. Screen
DESIGN
Repeated measures design with one independent variable having 2 levels. Each participant was
exposed to both the levels – desirable and undesirable trait words.
PROCEDURE
The E arranged the screen and the materials and called the P to the laboratory. S/he was made to
sit comfortably, rapport was built, and s/he was given the following instructions.
Instructions for the first task
"This is a simple experiment on naming colours.
You will be presented with two sheets, one after the other. Each sheet will have series of colours in
the context of words. Your task is to name aloud only the colour in which the words have been
written, as quickly and as accurately, as you can. Begin from the first column, top most word and
proceed vertically down the column. Move from one column to the next without skipping any
column. Do not use your finger to point out or do not nod your head while you name the colours. E
explained P all the above instructions one by one with the help of demo sheet. E asked P to name
the colours in the demo sheet twice making sure all the instructions are understood and followed
well by the P.
After ensuring that the P had understood the task, s/he was given the first sheet of 72 words. E said
‘Start’, started the stopwatch the moment P started naming the colours. If the P engaged in nodding
or pointing, E stopped the stopwatch, noted the time till then, cautioned P not use those behaviors,
and continued timing him or her. If P engaged in reading the words instead of naming the ink colours
for three consecutive times, E stopped the stopwatch, noted the time till then, cautioned P not use
those behaviors, and continued timing him or her. The time taken to name the colours of the first
sheet was carefully noted. The errors, if any, were carefully noted. 30 seconds unfilled interval was
given after the first sheet was completed. Then the second sheet was given. The same procedure
was ensured while giving this sheet as in the first sheet.
Instructions for the second task
"In the second task, you have to write down on this sheet of paper (show the blank sheet to the P),
as many words as possible, that you remember having seen on both sheets presented earlier. Please
don't write the colours you named. The order of the words and whether they are from the first or
the second sheet is not important. You can write them as you remember them. You have 10 minutes
to recall and write the words. Please write the words vertically, one below the other. Please begin.
"
E gave the pencil and the recall Sheet and said 'start' and started the stopwatch simultaneously. E
noted the recall time taken by the P.
Post-task Questions
1. Have you heard anything about this experiment before?
2. Do you have any comments about this experiment?
3. What do you think was the purpose of this experiment?
4. Did you find anything unusual about this experiment?
5. Did you feel anxious at any point during the experiment? If so, explain.
18
6. Did you notice any difference in the words or how you named the colours on the 2 cards? If
yes, please explain.
7. Did nature of the words make any difference to how fast you named their colours and how
well you remembered them? If yes, please explain how?
8. Did you find the words on any one card more distracting than the other? Did that make it
easier or more difficult to name the colours on any one card? If yes, please explain how that
affected your experience.
9. Did you anticipate that there would be another task following the colour-naming task? If yes,
how and what did you anticipate?
10. Did you experience any difficulty in recalling the words? If yes, specify.
11. Did you feel that some words were easier to remember or stood out among the rest? If so,
which were they and why do you think you remembered them better?
DEBRIEFING
The purpose of the experiment was to study whether colour-naming time was longer for
undesirable trait words as compared to desirable trait words and whether undesirable trait
words were remembered better than desirable trait words. The participant was shown the two
cards and the difference between them was explained.
The participant was told that the task of naming the colour shows that people are sensitive to
the emotion entailed in the stimulus word though this feature is completely irrelevant to the
task. One way that people evaluate stimuli is to immediately find out whether a stimulus ‘good
for me’ or ‘bad for me’ without much conscious thought. Then our attention gets directed to the
stimulus that is evaluated as negative or undesirable. This shift in attention occurs even without
the intention of the person. Negative words divert attention away from the colour name due to
a mechanism called ‘automatic vigilance’ in which people monitor their environment for
potential danger.
Thus, in the present experiment, it was expected that undesirable trait words would cause
problems disengaging attention from the words and focusing on the colour dimension.
Therefore, participant would take longer to name the colours of the undesirable trait words as
compared to the desirable trait words. It was also expected that some incidental learning (which
occurs without the learner’s intention) of the words would also occur. As undesirable
information would hold attention for longer, recall would be greater for the undesirable trait
words as compared to the desirable trait words. Results were explained to the participant with
respect to time taken to name the colours and number of words recalled in the two conditions.
This task has been used in clinical studies using words specific to the individual’s concerns such
as anxiety, phobia etc. e.g. depressed individuals would be slower in naming depressive words
as compared to neutral words. Past research indicates a specific attention mechanism sensitive
to positive and negative adjectives used to characterize safe and risky social environments.
There is an adaptive advantage for organisms having the capacity to attend to undesirable
stimulus quickly and with little effort.
The application to daily life is how automatic processing plays a role in impression formation,
stereotypes and group processing. Automatic vigilance can lead to a negative bias in judgment
and memory. It explains how unfavorable information about individual or stereotyped groups is
often noticed and remembered better than favorable information even without the perceiver
intending to do so, thus making the person’s impression of that individual or social group
19
negatively biased. Therefore, people’s greater attention to negative information may protect
them from immediate harm but one should be mindful that it can also contribute to prejudice
and conflict in social interaction.
ANALYSIS OF DATA
Individual data
1) A comparative analysis of the colour naming time (in seconds) and the number of words
recalled for the two conditions was presented in Table 1. (In case of Recall, only the desirable
and undesirable trait words were counted. Neutral words from the first and last columns on
both the cards were not to be counted.)
2) Bar graphs were drawn to depict the colour naming time and number of words recalled in
the two conditions (Figures 1 and 2 respectively).
Table 1: Comparison of Colour naming time in seconds and No. of words recalled for Undesirable
and Desirable Trait Words
Colour naming time in seconds No. of words recalled

Undesirable Trait Words
Desirable Trait Words
Difference =
Group data
1) A comparative analysis of the Colour naming time for Undesirable and Desirable Trait
Words of 20 participants was presented in Table 2 and the calculation of t value (Paired t
test) was shown below the table.
2) A comparative analysis of the Recall scores for Undesirable and Desirable Trait Words of 20
participants was presented in Table 3 and the calculation of t value (Paired t test) was
shown below the table.
3) Bar graphs were drawn to depict the Mean colour naming time and Mean recall score of 20
participants in the two conditions (Figures 3 and 4 respectively).
Table 2: Comparative analysis of the Colour naming time for Undesirable and Desirable Trait
Words of 20 participants and the calculation of t value
Undesirable trait words Desirable trait words

Ps Colour naming time Colour naming time Difference Difference²
1
2
19
20
Table 3: Comparative analysis of the Recall scores for Undesirable and Desirable Trait Words of
20 participants and the calculation of t value
Undesirable trait words Desirable trait words

Ps Recall scores Recall scores Difference Difference²
1
2
19
20
20
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION:

Individual data
Discuss the total time taken to name colours in context of desirable and undesirable trait words.
Is the trend as expected? Provide theory basis to support the results. If contrary trend observed,
discuss the confounding factors operated during the conduct.
Comment on the number of undesirable and desirable traits words recalled. Is the trend in
expected direction? Then discuss relevant theory or research. If contrary findings are observed,
discuss methodological issues or confounding factors relevant explaining the trend.
Discuss whether the trends in the individual data were consistent with the Null Hypothesis or not?
As ancillary observation, discuss the number of errors made and type of errors made. Does it
indicate any influence of IV? What does it show about the attitude of the P while doing the task?
Was there any speed accuracy trade off observed?
Any factors operating during the conduct affecting the results? Discuss whether controls were in
place or not? Did the attitude and emotional state of participant influence the results in any way?
Incorporate PTQs to explain the trends observed.
Provide relevant theory and research to augment the results obtained.
Group data
Is the mean time taken to name the colours in context of undesirable trait words higher than the
mean time taken to name the colours in the context of desirable trait words?
Is the mean number of undesirable trait words recalled more than the mean number of desirable
trait words recalled?
Which inferential statistical technique would you use to analyse the group data and why? Provide
reasons.
Are the results statistically significant? Report t values with degree of freedom and statistical
significance. Report the results as per APA format.
Is the alternative hypothesis validated by the group data or not based on the inferential statistics?
Provide relevant theoretical or research basis. If the group data is not as expected, provide
confounding factors or explain methodological issues of the experiment.
Evaluate the experiment on the basis of internal validity, external validity, experimental realism,
and mundane realism.
Could there be any modifications? Any new lines of inquiry? Recent research? Suggestions for
improvement?
Provide appropriate conclusion as per APA format.
CONCLUSION
The main trends in the Individual Data were/were not consistent with the relevant past research
and theories for total time taken to name the colours of undesirable and desirable trait words
alone/ number of undesirable and desirable trait words recalled alone/ for total time taken and
words recalled both.
The hypothesis that 1) ‘Total time taken to name the colours of undesirable trait words are more
than that of desirable trait words’, was/was not validated by the Group Data, on the basis of the
obtained t value and its significance; 2) ‘The undesirable trait words are recalled more than the
desirable trait words’, was/was not validated by the Group Data, on the basis of the obtained t
value and its significance.
21
REFERENCES
Ben-Haim, Moshe Shay & Williams, Paul & Howard, Zachary & Mama, Yaniv & Eidels, Ami &
Algom, Daniel. (2016). The Emotional Stroop Task: Assessing Cognitive Performance under
Exposure to Emotional Content. Journal of Visualized Experiments. 2016. 10.3791/53720.
Chajut, Eran & Mama, Yaniv & Levy, Leora & Algom, Daniel. (2010). Avoiding the Approach Trap: A
Response Bias Theory of the Emotional Stroop Effect. Journal of experimental psychology.
Learning, memory, and cognition. 36. 1567-72. 10.1037/a0020710.
Pratto, Felicia & John, Oliver. (1991). Automatic Vigilance: The Attention-Grabbing Power of
Negative Social Information. Journal of personality and social psychology. 61. 380-91.
10.1037//0022-3514.61.3.380.
Price, Shelley & Beech, Anthony & Mitchell, Ian & Humphreys, Glyn. (2011). The promises and
perils of the emotional Stroop task: A general review and considerations for use with forensic
samples. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 2011. 1–16. 10.1080/13552600.2010.545149.
Wentura, Dirk & Rothermund, Klaus & Bak, Peter. (2000). Automatic Vigilance: The Attention-
Grabbing Power of Approach and Avoidance-Related Social Information. Journal of personality and
social psychology. 78. 1024-37. 10.1037/0022-3514.78.6.1024.
Williams JM, Mathews A, MacLeod C. The emotional Stroop task and psychopathology.
Psychological Bulletin. 1996;120(1):3-24. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.120.1.3
Yiend, Jenny. (2010). The effects of emotion on attention: A review of attentional processing of
emotional information. Cognition & Emotion. 24. 3-47. 10.1080/02699930903205698.
APPENDICES
Scoring Sheets
Undesirable trait words
Row Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4
No C W C W C W C W
1 Red modern Pink cruel Brown Violent Green unforgiving
2 Green unknown Blue biased Red boastful Brown brutal
3 Brown harmless Green listless Blue dismissive Orange conniving
4 Pink careful Red incapable Orange Rough Blue mean
5 Orange undemanding Brown quarrelsome Green Selfish Pink jealous
6 Blue realistic Orange bossy Pink merciless Red aggressive
No. C W C W C W C W
1 Orange wicked Blue vicious Red Bossy Pink brutal

22
2 Pink depressed Orange sluggish Green merciless Blue isolated
3 Red isolated Pink apathetic Brown aggressive Green immature
4 Green lonely Brown immature Pink Stingy Red incapable
5 Blue ruthless Red dull Orange intolerant Brown selfish
6 Brown stingy Green intolerant Blue Violent Orange apathetic
No. C W C W C W C W
1 Brown mean Green wicked Orange Lonely Blue realistic
2 Red biased Brown dismissive Pink sluggish Orange modern
3 Blue conniving Orange vicious Red ruthless Pink harmless
4 Orange dull Blue unforgiving Green depressed Brown unknown
5 Green jealous Pink boastful Blue Cruel Red undemanding
6 Pink quarrelsome Red listless Brown Rough Green careful
Desirable trait words
No. C W C W C W C W
1 Red normal Pink witty Brown Cordial Green sympathetic
2 Green choosey Blue honest Red creative Brown humble
3 Brown reserved Green carefree Blue persistent Orange sensitive
4 Pink curious Red inventive Orange Smart Blue fair
5 Orange complicated Brown considerate Green content Pink sincere
6 Blue systematic Orange happy Pink confident Red hospitable
No. C W C W C W C W
1 Orange clever Blue helpful Red Happy Pink humble

23
2 Pink organized Orange flexible Green confident Blue generous
3 Red generous Pink brilliant Brown hospitable Green skillful
4 Green active Brown skillful Pink Loving Red inventive
5 Blue friendly Red kind Orange optimistic Brown content
6 Brown loving Green optimistic Blue Cordial Orange brilliant
No. C W C W C W C W
1 Brown fair Green clever Orange Active Blue systematic
2 Red honest Brown persistent Pink Flexible Orange normal
3 Blue sensitive Orange helpful Red Friendly Pink reserved
4 Orange kind Blue sympathetic Green organized Brown choosey
5 Green sincere Pink creative Blue Witty Red complicated
6 Pink considerate Red carefree Brown Smart Green curious
Word lists
No. Neutral words Undesirable trait words Desirable trait words

1 modern cruel witty
2 unknown biased honest
3 harmless listless carefree
4 careful incapable inventive
5 undemanding quarrelsome considerate
6 realistic bossy happy
7 normal violent cordial
8 choosey boastful creative
9 reserved dismissive persistent
10 curious rough smart
11 complicated selfish content
12 systematic merciless confident
13 unforgiving sympathetic
14 brutal humble
24
15 conniving sensitive
16 mean fair
17 jealous sincere
18 aggressive hospitable
19 wicked clever
20 depressed organized
21 isolated generous
22 lonely active
23 ruthless friendly
24 stingy loving
25 vicious helpful
26 sluggish flexible
27 apathetic brilliant
28 immature skillful
29 Dull kind
30 intolerant optimistic
Undesirable and desirable word cards:

25
The Automatic Vigilance Experiment – Checklists
Instructions/Conduct 10 marks each, total 20 marks
Sn Instructions -10 marks Marks

I Instructions for task One
1 This is a simple experiment on naming colours 0.5
You will be presented with two sheets, one after the other
2 Each sheet will have series of colours in the context of words. Your task is to name 01
aloud only the colour in which the words have been written, as quickly and as
accurately, as you can
3 Begin from the first column, top most word and proceed vertically down the 0.5
column. Move from one column to the next without skipping any column
4 Do not use your finger to point out or do not nod your head while you name the 0.5
colours
5 E explained all the above instructions with the help of demo sheet. 01
E asked P to name the colours in the demo sheet twice making sure all the
instructions are understood and followed well by the P
6 P asked to repeat major points of the instructions to ensure that the P has 01
understood them
Sheet 1 was presented
30 seconds unfilled interval was given after the first sheet was completed. 0.5
Sheet 2 was presented
II Instructions for task Two

1 "In the second task, you have to write down on this sheet of paper (show the blank 01
sheet to the P), as many words as possible, that you remember to have seen on
both sheets presented earlier
2 Please don't write the colours you named. Their order is not important 01
3 You can write them as you remember them, whether they are from the first or the 01
second sheet it does not matter
4 You have 10 minutes to recall and write the words. 01
5 Please write the words vertically, one below the other 0.5
6 The recall instructions summarized by the E 0.5
Total 10.0
Deductions
All instructions given, but sequence altered 0.5

Fumbled 0.5
had to refer to the notes 0.5
Any other error – depending on severity - range 0.5 to 2 marks
10.0 – deductions = Final Marks of Instructions

26
*Conduct – Supervise either Sheet 1 or Sheet 2 during final examination
I Conduct – Sheet 1
1 P was given the first sheet of 72 words 0.5
2 E said ‘Start’, Started the stopwatch the moment P started naming the colours. 0.5
3 If the P engaged in nodding or pointing, E stopped the stopwatch, noted the time till 01
then, cautioned P not use those behaviors, and continued timing him or her.
4 If P engaged in reading the words instead of naming the ink colours for three 01
consecutive times, E stopped the stopwatch, noted the time till then, cautioned P not
use those behaviors, and continued timing the P
5 The time taken to name the colours of the first sheet was carefully noted. 01
6 The errors were carefully noted 01
II Conduct – Sheet 2
1 E said ‘Start’, Started the stopwatch the moment P started naming the colours.
2 If the P engaged in nodding or pointing, E stopped the stopwatch, noted the time till
then, cautioned P not use those behaviors, and continued timing him or her.
3 If P engaged in reading the words instead of naming the ink colours for three
consecutive times, E stopped the stopwatch, noted the time till then, cautioned P not
use those behaviors, and continued timing the P
4 The time taken to name the colours of the second sheet was carefully noted.
5 The errors were carefully noted
III Conduct – recall task
1 The P is given Pencil and a sheet of paper 0.5
2 The signal ‘start’ is given and the stopwatch is started immediately 0.5
3 The time given is 10 minutes. If the P returns the sheet before time, the P is told that 1.0
there is some more time. If the P insists on returning the sheet, the time taken for
the task is carefully noted
4 Debriefing 3.0
Total 10.0
Deductions
1 Conduct not smooth 01

2 Stop watch error 0.5
3 Any other error- depending on severity - range 0.5 to 2 marks
10.0 – deductions = Final Marks Conduct
Any other observation/Comment:

Abstract:‌ ‌
The‌‌automatic‌‌processing‌‌of‌‌information‌‌was‌‌investigated,‌‌varying‌‌valence‌‌(positive‌‌vs.‌‌
negative)‌‌and‌‌relevance‌‌(other-relevant‌‌traits‌‌[ORT]‌‌vs.‌‌possessor-relevant‌‌traits‌‌[PRT];‌‌G.‌‌
Peeters,‌‌1983)‌‌of‌‌stimuli.‌‌ORTs‌‌denote‌‌unconditionally‌‌positive‌‌or‌‌negative‌‌consequences‌‌for‌‌
persons‌‌in‌‌the‌‌social‌‌environment‌‌of‌‌the‌‌holder‌‌of‌‌the‌‌trait‌‌(e.g.,‌‌honest,‌‌brutal)‌‌whereas‌‌PRTs‌‌
denote‌‌unconditionally‌‌positive‌‌or‌‌negative‌‌consequences‌‌for‌‌the‌‌trait‌‌holder‌‌(e.g.,‌‌happy,‌‌
depressive).‌‌In‌‌2‌‌experiments‌‌using‌‌the‌‌Stroop‌‌paradigm,‌‌larger‌‌interference‌‌effects‌‌were‌‌found‌‌
for‌‌ORTs‌‌than‌‌PRTs.‌‌This‌‌is‌‌due‌‌to‌‌the‌‌behavior-relatedness‌‌of‌‌ORTs.‌‌In‌‌a‌‌go/no-go‌‌lexical‌‌
decision‌‌task‌‌(Experiment‌‌3),‌‌participants‌‌either‌‌had‌‌to‌‌withdraw‌‌their‌‌finger‌‌from‌‌a‌‌pressed‌‌key‌‌
(i.e.,‌‌"avoid")‌‌or‌‌had‌‌to‌‌press‌‌a‌‌key‌‌(i.e.,‌‌"approach")‌‌if‌‌a‌‌word‌‌was‌‌presented.‌‌Responses‌‌to‌‌
negative‌‌ORTs‌‌were‌‌relatively‌‌faster‌‌in‌‌the‌‌withdraw‌‌condition,‌‌whereas‌‌positive‌‌ORTs‌‌were‌‌
relatively‌‌faster‌‌in‌‌the‌‌press‌‌condition.‌ ‌
Introduction:‌ ‌
Automatic‌‌Vigilance‌‌is‌‌a‌‌very‌‌strong‌‌tendency‌‌to‌‌pay‌‌attention‌‌to‌‌undesirable‌‌or‌‌negative‌‌
information.‌‌It‌‌is‌‌the‌‌attention‌‌grabbing‌‌power‌‌of‌‌negative‌‌social‌‌information.‌‌It‌‌can‌‌be‌‌described‌‌
as‌‌the‌‌role‌‌of‌‌working‌‌memory‌‌in‌‌the‌‌attention‌‌interference‌‌of‌‌negative‌‌information.‌‌Automatic‌‌
vigilance‌‌occurs‌‌when‌‌a‌‌negatively‌‌valenced‌‌target‌‌stimulus‌‌is‌‌categorized‌‌faster‌‌and/or‌‌more‌‌
accurately‌‌when‌‌it‌‌is‌‌preceded‌‌by‌‌a‌‌threatening‌‌prime‌‌stimulus‌‌than‌‌a‌‌hedonically‌‌neutral‌‌prime‌‌
stimulus.‌‌Researchers‌‌suggest‌‌that‌‌the‌‌presentation‌‌of‌‌an‌‌evaluative‌‌or‌‌threatening‌‌prime‌‌may‌‌
automatically‌‌activate‌‌biased‌‌perceptions‌‌of‌‌emotionally-congruent‌‌targets.‌‌The‌‌explanation‌‌for‌‌
this‌‌effect‌‌is‌‌that,‌‌when‌‌confronted‌‌with‌‌a‌‌threatening‌‌stimulus,‌‌people‌‌typically‌‌devote‌‌increased‌‌
attentional‌‌resources‌‌to‌‌that‌‌stimulus,‌‌raising‌‌the‌‌accessibility‌‌of‌‌evaluatively-similar‌‌information‌‌
in‌‌memory,‌‌and‌‌biasing‌‌subsequent‌‌perceptions‌‌and‌‌judgments‌‌toward‌‌a‌‌threatening‌‌evaluation.‌‌
John‌‌Ridley‌‌Stroop‌‌in‌‌1935,‌‌published‌‌an‌‌article‌‌on‌‌Studies‌‌of‌‌interference‌‌in‌‌serial‌‌verbal‌‌
reactions‌‌in‌‌the‌‌Journal‌‌Of‌‌Experimental‌‌Psychology.‌‌The‌‌Stroop‌‌Effect‌‌is‌‌named‌‌after‌‌John‌‌
Ridley‌‌Stroop.‌‌The‌‌Stroop‌‌effect‌‌is‌‌based‌‌on‌‌the‌‌phenomenon‌‌of‌‌selective‌‌attention.‌‌It‌‌refers‌‌to‌‌
the‌‌ability‌‌of‌‌an‌‌individual‌‌to‌‌focus‌‌and‌‌respond‌‌to‌‌a‌‌specific‌‌environmental‌‌stimuli‌‌and‌‌while‌‌
ignoring‌‌the‌‌others.‌‌The‌‌effect‌‌that‌‌occurs‌‌when‌‌an‌‌individual‌‌must‌‌name‌‌aloud‌‌the‌‌colour‌‌of‌‌the‌‌
word‌‌instead‌‌of‌‌that‌‌word,‌‌is‌‌known‌‌as‌‌the‌‌Stroop‌‌Effect.‌‌It‌‌is‌‌the‌‌delay‌‌in‌‌the‌‌reaction‌‌time‌‌when‌‌
the‌‌colour‌‌of‌‌the‌‌word‌‌does‌‌not‌‌match‌‌with‌‌the‌‌word.‌‌It‌‌is‌‌the‌‌level‌‌of‌‌difficulty‌‌people‌‌face‌‌
while‌‌naming‌‌the‌‌colour‌‌of‌‌the‌‌word‌‌instead‌‌of‌‌the‌‌word‌‌itself.‌‌The‌‌following‌‌are‌‌the‌‌Variations‌‌
of‌‌the‌‌Stroop‌‌Task:‌ ‌
A)‌‌Emotional‌‌Stroop‌‌effect:‌H
‌ ere,‌‌individuals‌‌are‌‌given‌‌negative‌‌emotional‌‌words‌‌like‌‌grief‌‌
along‌‌with‌‌neutral‌‌words‌‌like.‌‌pen.‌‌The‌‌words‌‌are‌‌coloured‌‌and‌‌they‌‌have‌‌to‌‌name‌‌the‌‌colour‌‌in‌‌
which‌‌the‌‌words‌‌are‌‌written.‌‌It‌‌has‌‌been‌‌seen‌‌that‌‌those‌‌who‌‌are‌‌having‌‌a‌‌depressive‌‌episode‌‌
name‌‌the‌‌colour‌‌of‌‌the‌‌negative‌‌word‌‌slower‌‌than‌‌that‌‌of‌‌the‌‌neutral‌‌word.‌‌This‌‌task‌‌emphasises‌‌
that‌‌a‌‌conflict‌‌arises‌‌between‌‌the‌‌word‌‌and‌‌its‌‌emotional‌‌relevance‌‌to‌‌the‌‌individual.‌ ‌
B)‌‌Picture-Word‌‌Task:‌‌‌In‌‌this,‌‌individuals‌‌are‌‌presented‌‌with‌‌pictures‌‌with‌‌words‌‌written‌‌on‌‌it‌‌
and‌‌their‌‌task‌‌is‌‌to‌‌name‌‌the‌‌pictures‌‌while‌‌ignoring‌‌the‌‌words.‌‌This‌‌conflict‌‌between‌‌2‌‌
incongruent‌‌items‌‌makes‌‌it‌‌difficult‌‌for‌‌individuals‌‌to‌‌complete‌‌the‌‌task‌‌and‌‌slower‌‌their‌‌
performance.‌ ‌
C)‌‌Reverse‌‌Stroop‌‌effect:‌‌‌Here,‌‌individuals‌‌are‌‌shown‌‌a‌‌page‌‌with‌‌a‌‌black‌‌square‌‌which‌‌has‌‌an‌‌
incongruent‌‌coloured‌‌word‌‌(suppose‌‌word‌‌'blue'‌‌written‌‌in‌‌red‌‌colour)‌‌and‌‌has‌‌4‌‌additional‌‌
smaller‌‌colored‌‌squares‌‌in‌‌the‌‌4‌‌corners‌‌of‌‌the‌‌main‌‌black‌‌square.‌‌Of‌‌those‌‌4‌‌squares,‌‌one‌‌will‌‌be‌‌
blue‌‌coloured,‌‌another‌‌will‌‌be‌‌red‌‌while‌‌the‌‌remaining‌‌will‌‌be‌‌in‌‌other‌‌colours.‌‌The‌‌task‌‌will‌‌be‌‌
to‌‌point‌‌out‌‌at‌‌the‌‌coloured‌‌square‌‌of‌‌the‌‌written‌‌colour‌‌i.e.‌‌blue.‌‌But‌‌this‌‌will‌‌cause‌‌a‌‌delay‌‌as‌‌
incongruently-colored‌‌words‌‌interfere‌‌with‌‌pointing‌‌to‌‌the‌‌accurate‌‌square.‌‌Few‌‌contemporary‌‌
published‌‌studies‌‌demonstrate‌‌similar‌‌findings‌‌in‌‌line‌‌with‌‌the‌‌effect‌‌of‌‌semantic‌‌meaning‌‌on‌‌
automatic‌‌vigilance.‌‌(Wentura‌‌and‌‌Rothermund,‌‌2000).‌‌In‌‌the‌‌article‌‌titled‌‌Automatic‌‌Vigilance‌‌
for‌‌Negative‌‌Words‌‌in‌‌Lexical‌‌Decision‌‌and‌‌Naming(2006),‌‌stimuli(positive,‌‌negative,neutral)‌‌
from‌‌32‌‌published‌‌studies‌‌were‌‌analyzed.‌‌The‌‌yielded‌‌results‌‌suggested‌‌that‌‌word‌‌
valence(affective‌‌quality)‌‌does‌‌impact‌‌word‌‌naming‌‌and‌‌that‌‌response‌‌is‌‌quick‌‌when‌‌presented‌‌
with‌‌a‌‌positive‌‌stimulus‌‌while‌‌if‌‌it‌‌is‌‌negative,‌‌responses‌‌in‌‌terms‌‌of‌‌color,‌‌pronunciation‌‌and‌‌
lexical‌‌status‌‌are‌‌delayed‌‌due‌‌to‌‌the‌‌attention‌‌of‌‌processing‌‌resources‌‌being‌‌focused‌‌on‌‌word‌‌
valence‌‌and‌‌diverted‌‌away‌‌from‌‌other‌‌properties.‌‌In‌‌another‌‌study‌‌named‌‌Automatic‌‌Vigilance:‌‌
The‌‌Attention-Grabbing‌‌Power‌‌Of‌‌Negative‌‌Social‌‌Information,‌‌automatic‌‌vigilance‌‌is‌‌viewed‌‌as‌‌
a‌‌"default"‌‌response:‌‌the‌‌Ss‌‌across‌‌all‌‌the‌‌experiments‌‌displayed‌‌longer‌‌color‌‌naming‌‌latencies‌‌
for‌‌undesirable‌‌traits,‌‌facilitating‌‌greater‌‌incidental‌‌learning‌‌as‌‌compared‌‌to‌‌desirable‌‌traits.‌‌This‌‌
serves‌‌as‌‌an‌‌input‌‌to‌‌deliberate‌‌processing‌‌when‌‌impression‌‌formation‌‌goals‌‌are‌‌(or‌‌have‌‌
become)‌‌active.‌‌The‌‌Stroop‌‌interference‌‌paradigm‌‌was‌‌first‌‌developed‌‌by‌‌John‌‌Ridley‌‌in‌‌1935.‌‌It‌‌
is‌‌the‌‌effect‌‌that‌‌happens‌‌while‌‌reading‌‌the‌‌words‌‌colored‌‌in‌‌different‌‌inks.‌‌The‌‌delay‌‌in‌‌the‌‌
reaction‌‌time‌‌reveals‌‌that‌‌incongruence‌‌between‌‌the‌‌color‌‌of‌‌the‌‌word‌‌and‌‌its‌‌content‌‌will‌‌impair‌‌
the‌‌ability‌‌to‌‌color‌‌the‌‌name‌‌accurately‌‌i.e‌‌names‌‌of‌‌the‌‌words‌‌interfere‌‌when‌‌you‌‌name‌‌out‌‌the‌‌
colors.In‌‌addition‌‌to‌‌that,‌‌undesirable‌‌trait‌‌words‌‌take‌‌more‌‌time‌‌to‌‌be‌‌named‌‌and‌‌are‌‌recalled‌‌
better‌‌as‌‌they‌‌have‌‌heavier‌‌word‌‌valence‌‌and‌‌elicit‌‌incidental‌‌learning‌‌as‌‌stated‌‌earlier.‌‌In‌‌this‌‌
way‌‌it‌‌supports‌‌the‌‌hypothesis‌‌of‌‌this‌‌experiment.‌‌Valence‌‌of‌‌information‌‌is‌‌the‌‌positive‌‌or‌‌
negative‌‌nature‌‌and‌‌their‌‌affective‌‌quality‌‌referring‌‌to‌‌an‌‌event,‌‌object‌‌or‌‌situation.‌‌Automatic‌‌
stimulus‌‌evaluation‌‌is‌‌the‌‌fast,‌‌efficient,‌‌and‌‌unconscious‌‌evaluation‌‌of‌‌a‌‌stimulus‌‌as‌‌good/bad,‌‌
and‌‌it‌‌plays‌‌a‌‌profound‌‌role‌‌in‌‌everyday‌‌life.‌‌One‌‌of‌‌the‌‌functions‌‌of‌‌automatic‌‌stimulus‌‌
evaluation‌‌is‌‌to‌‌direct‌‌attention‌‌toward‌‌events‌‌that‌‌may‌‌have‌‌undesirable‌‌consequences‌‌for‌‌the‌‌
perceiver's‌‌well-being.‌‌To‌‌test‌‌whether‌‌attentional‌‌resources‌‌are‌‌automatically‌‌directed‌‌away‌‌
from‌‌an‌‌attended‌‌task‌‌to‌‌undesirable‌‌stimuli,‌‌John‌‌and‌‌Pratto‌‌named‌‌the‌‌colors‌‌in‌‌which‌‌desirable‌‌
and‌‌undesirable‌‌traits‌‌(e.g.,‌‌honest,‌‌sadistic)‌‌appeared.‌‌Across‌‌3‌‌experiments,‌‌color-naming‌‌
latencies‌‌were‌‌consistently‌‌longer‌‌for‌‌undesirable‌‌traits‌‌but‌‌did‌‌not‌‌differ‌‌within‌‌the‌‌desirable‌‌and‌‌
undesirable‌‌categories.‌‌In‌‌experiment‌‌1,‌‌subjects‌‌were‌‌asked‌‌to‌‌name‌‌the‌‌color‌‌that‌‌the‌‌word‌‌was‌‌
printed‌‌in.‌‌They‌‌measured‌‌the‌‌time‌‌it‌‌took‌‌to‌‌identify‌‌the‌‌color.‌‌The‌‌results‌‌were‌‌that‌‌it‌‌took‌‌29‌‌
milliseconds‌‌longer‌‌to‌‌name‌‌the‌‌color‌‌of‌‌negative‌‌words‌‌than‌‌positive‌‌words.‌‌In‌‌the‌‌second‌‌
experiment,‌‌they‌‌repeated‌‌the‌‌first‌‌experiment‌‌but‌‌afterwards‌‌asked‌‌the‌‌students‌‌to‌‌recall‌‌as‌‌
many‌‌words‌‌as‌‌possible.‌‌The‌‌results‌‌showed‌‌that‌‌subjects‌‌recalled‌‌twice‌‌as‌‌many‌‌undesirable‌‌
than‌‌desirable‌‌traits‌‌since‌‌they‌‌focused‌‌longer‌‌on‌‌the‌‌words‌‌on‌‌the‌‌undesirable‌‌trait‌‌chart.‌‌
Undesirable‌‌traits‌‌attract‌‌more‌‌attention‌‌than‌‌desirable‌‌traits.‌‌In‌‌the‌‌final‌‌experiment,‌‌valence‌‌of‌‌
information‌‌was‌‌measured‌‌by‌‌base‌‌usage‌‌rates‌‌of‌‌positive‌‌and‌‌negative‌‌words‌‌causing‌‌the‌‌delay‌‌
in‌‌comprehension.‌‌The‌‌results‌‌showed‌‌no‌‌base‌‌rate‌‌effect‌‌even‌‌after‌‌adding‌‌more‌‌words‌‌to‌‌
remove‌‌potential‌‌bias.‌‌In‌‌a‌‌number‌‌of‌‌studies,‌‌it‌‌has‌‌been‌‌shown‌‌that‌‌stimuli‌‌are‌‌automatically‌‌
categorized‌‌as‌‌positive‌‌or‌‌negative.‌‌The‌‌main‌‌objective‌‌of‌‌this‌‌research‌‌was‌‌focused‌‌on‌‌the‌‌
attention‌‌demanding‌‌characteristics‌‌of‌‌evaluatively‌‌polarized‌‌stimuli.‌‌An‌‌experiment‌‌was‌‌
conducted‌‌in‌‌which‌‌the‌‌main‌‌hypothesis‌‌was‌‌that‌‌the‌‌colour‌‌naming‌‌latencies‌‌for‌‌other‌‌relevant‌‌
stimuli‌‌compared‌‌with‌‌possessor-relevant‌‌words‌‌are‌‌longer‌‌because‌‌of‌‌their‌‌attention‌‌attracting‌‌
characteristics.‌‌There‌‌were‌‌53‌‌students‌‌as‌‌participants‌‌and‌‌the‌‌materials‌‌consisted‌‌of‌‌100‌‌words‌‌
(50‌‌positive‌‌adjectives‌‌and‌‌50‌‌negative‌‌adjectives).‌‌The‌‌stimuli‌‌were‌‌presented‌‌in‌‌the‌‌center‌‌of‌‌a‌‌
computer‌‌screen‌‌in‌‌four‌‌colours.‌‌The‌‌participants‌‌were‌‌to‌‌name‌‌only‌‌the‌‌colour‌‌of‌‌the‌‌stimulus‌‌as‌‌
quickly‌‌as‌‌possible.‌‌Results‌‌of‌‌this‌‌experiment‌‌are‌‌that‌‌the‌‌data‌‌supports‌‌the‌‌importance‌‌of‌‌the‌‌
relevance‌‌distinction.‌‌A‌‌reliable‌‌main‌‌effect‌‌of‌‌the‌‌relevance‌‌emerged.‌‌Other-relevant‌‌trait‌‌
adjectives‌‌produced‌‌longer‌‌colour‌‌naming‌‌latencies‌‌compared‌‌with‌‌possessor‌‌relevant‌‌adjectives.‌‌
Automatic‌‌Vigilance:‌‌Synonym‌‌Selection‌‌Problems‌‌-‌‌A‌‌Literature‌‌Review‌‌The‌‌participants‌‌
performed‌‌a‌‌series‌‌of‌‌synonym-selection‌‌problems.‌‌The‌‌objective‌‌was‌‌to‌‌find‌‌the‌‌closest‌‌
synonym‌‌to‌‌a‌‌given‌‌word‌‌out‌‌of‌‌other‌‌alternatives.‌‌Failure‌‌or‌‌success‌‌was‌‌induced‌‌by‌‌giving‌‌
either‌‌positive‌‌or‌‌negative‌‌feedback‌‌manipulated‌‌independently‌‌whether‌‌the‌‌correct‌‌solution‌‌was‌
selected.‌‌In‌‌the‌‌second‌‌part‌‌of‌‌the‌‌experiment,‌‌automatic‌‌vigilance‌‌for‌‌information‌‌relating‌‌to‌‌the‌‌
previous‌‌synonym‌‌problems‌‌was‌‌measured.‌‌The‌‌target‌‌words‌‌of‌‌the‌‌synonym‌‌problems‌‌for‌‌
which‌‌negative‌‌feedback‌‌had‌‌been‌‌given‌‌produced‌‌increased‌‌interference‌‌effects‌‌in‌‌a‌‌subsequent‌‌
reaction‌‌time.‌‌Automatic‌‌Vigilance:‌‌Effect‌‌on‌‌Search‌‌Times‌‌-‌‌A‌‌Literature‌‌Review‌‌A‌‌study‌‌
explored‌‌the‌‌evidence‌‌for‌‌an‌‌enhanced‌‌visual‌‌acuity‌‌in‌‌a‌‌fearful‌‌mood.‌‌It‌‌was‌‌hypothesized:‌
"When‌‌induced‌‌into‌‌an‌‌emotional‌‌state,‌‌the‌‌participants‌‌would‌‌be‌‌able‌‌to‌‌locate‌‌the‌‌fearful‌‌target‌‌
more‌‌quickly."‌‌The‌‌participants‌‌were‌‌shown‌‌fearful,‌‌happy,‌‌and‌‌neutral‌‌faces‌‌in‌‌order‌‌to‌‌induce‌‌a‌‌
particular‌‌mood‌‌state.‌‌Results:‌‌Mood‌‌induction‌‌seems‌‌to‌‌have‌‌little‌‌effect‌‌on‌‌search‌‌times;‌‌the‌
amygdala's‌‌role‌‌is‌‌evidence‌‌of‌‌making‌‌individuals‌‌more‌‌aware‌‌of‌‌cues‌‌and‌‌stimuli‌‌which‌‌are‌‌
threatening.‌‌Research‌‌Studies‌‌On‌‌Effect‌‌Of‌‌Semantic‌‌Meaning‌‌On‌‌Colour‌‌Naming:‌ ‌
1.‌‌Influence‌‌of‌‌color‌‌word‌‌availability‌‌‌on‌‌the‌‌Stroop‌‌color-naming‌‌effect‌‌by‌‌HYOSUN‌‌KIM‌‌
AND‌‌YANG‌‌SEOK‌‌CHO‌‌Korea‌‌University,‌‌Seoul,‌‌South‌‌Korea‌‌and‌‌MOTONORI‌‌
YAMAGUCHI‌‌AND‌‌ROBERT‌‌W.‌‌PROCTOR‌‌Purdue‌‌University,‌‌Purdue‌‌Indiana.‌‌The‌‌purpose‌‌
of‌‌this‌‌study‌‌was‌‌to‌‌see‌‌if‌‌the‌‌Stroop‌‌color-naming‌‌effect‌‌can‌‌be‌‌attributed‌‌to‌‌automatic‌
color-word‌‌processing‌‌or‌‌to‌‌paying‌‌attention‌‌to‌‌its‌‌(task‌‌irrelevant)‌‌meaning.‌‌Three‌‌experiments‌‌
were‌‌carried‌‌out‌‌based‌‌on‌‌the‌‌hypothesis‌‌that‌‌the‌‌Stroop‌‌effect's‌‌magnitude‌‌is‌‌a‌‌direct‌‌function‌‌of‌‌
the‌‌likelihood‌‌that‌‌the‌‌colour‌‌word‌‌will‌‌be‌‌used‌‌to‌‌attract‌‌the‌‌viewer's‌‌attention.‌‌In‌‌Experiment‌‌1,‌‌
a‌‌colour‌‌bar‌‌served‌‌as‌‌the‌‌colour‌‌carrier,‌‌with‌‌colour‌‌and‌‌neutral‌‌words‌‌appearing‌‌above‌‌or‌‌below‌‌
the‌‌colour‌‌bar.‌‌In‌‌Experiment‌‌2,‌‌the‌‌colour‌‌carrier‌‌could‌‌appear‌‌in‌‌one‌‌of‌‌the‌‌peripheral‌‌locations,‌‌
with‌‌the‌‌colour‌‌word‌‌appearing‌‌at‌‌fixation.‌‌The‌‌Stroop‌‌effect‌‌increased‌‌as‌‌the‌‌display‌‌duration‌‌
increased,‌‌and‌‌then‌‌Stroop‌‌dilution‌‌effect‌‌decreased.‌‌(a‌‌reduced‌‌Stroop‌‌effect‌‌when‌‌a‌‌neutral‌‌
word‌‌is‌‌also‌‌present)‌‌was‌‌roughly‌‌constant‌‌at‌‌all‌‌display‌‌durations.‌‌regardless‌‌of‌‌whether‌‌the‌‌
colour‌‌bar‌‌or‌‌colour‌‌word‌‌was‌‌at‌‌fixation.‌‌Experiment‌‌3‌‌manipulated‌‌the‌‌interval‌‌between‌‌the‌‌
onsets‌‌of‌‌the‌‌to-be-named‌‌colour‌‌and‌‌the‌‌colour‌‌word.‌‌With‌‌increasing‌‌delay‌‌in‌‌the‌‌onset‌‌of‌‌the‌‌
colour‌‌word.‌‌the‌‌Stroop‌‌effect‌‌decreased,‌‌but‌‌the‌‌absolute‌‌amount‌‌of‌‌Stroop‌‌dilution‌‌produced‌‌by‌‌
the‌‌neutral‌‌word‌‌increased.‌‌The‌‌findings‌‌of‌‌this‌‌study‌‌suggest‌‌that‌‌a‌‌shift‌‌in‌‌attention‌‌from‌‌the‌‌
colour‌‌carrier‌‌to‌‌the‌‌colour‌‌word‌‌is‌‌a‌‌key‌‌factor‌‌in‌‌determining‌‌the‌‌size‌‌of‌‌the‌‌Stroop‌‌effect.‌ ‌
2.‌‌Semantic‌‌Context‌‌Effects‌‌‌on‌‌Color‌‌Categorization‌‌Rony‌‌Kubat‌‌MIT‌‌Media‌‌Lab.‌‌20‌‌Ames‌‌
Street‌‌Cambridge,‌‌MA‌‌02139‌‌USA‌‌and‌‌Daniel‌‌Mirman‌‌Moss‌‌Rehabilitation‌‌Research‌‌Institute,‌‌
Albert‌‌Einstein‌‌Healthcare‌‌Network‌‌1200‌‌W‌‌Tabor‌‌Rd.‌‌Philadelphia.‌‌PA‌‌19141‌‌and‌‌Deb‌‌Roy‌‌
MIT‌‌Media‌‌Lab.‌‌20‌‌Ames‌‌Street‌‌Cambridge,‌‌MA‌‌02139‌‌USA.‌‌The‌‌representations‌‌are‌‌
composed‌‌of‌‌perceptual‌‌and‌‌motor‌‌representations‌‌these‌‌theories‌‌may‌‌be‌‌called‌‌grounded‌‌
because‌‌the‌‌"ground"‌‌concepts‌‌in‌‌sensory/perceptual-motor/action‌‌representations‌‌(Barbey,‌‌&‌‌
Wilson,‌‌2003)‌‌because‌‌it‌‌propose‌‌that‌‌semantic‌‌knowledge‌‌is‌‌distributed‌‌into‌‌perceptual-motor‌‌
systems.‌‌The‌‌meaning‌‌behind‌‌color‌‌naming‌‌involves‌‌precisely‌‌the‌‌same‌‌brain‌‌regions‌‌and‌‌
representations‌‌as‌‌perception‌‌of‌‌color,the‌‌mechanisms‌‌of‌‌color‌‌perception‌‌are‌‌an‌‌intrinsic‌‌part‌‌of‌‌
semantic‌‌knowledge.semantic‌‌knowledge‌‌is‌‌an‌‌intrinsic‌‌part‌‌of‌‌color‌‌perception.‌‌The‌‌color‌‌
perception‌‌is‌‌not‌‌merely‌‌a‌‌matter‌‌of‌‌the‌‌wavelengths‌‌of‌‌light‌‌hitting‌‌the‌‌retina,‌‌Now‌‌there‌‌is‌‌
direct‌‌evidence‌‌that‌‌knowledge‌‌is‌‌used‌‌to‌‌improve‌‌color‌‌constancy‌‌and‌‌word‌‌knowledge‌‌can‌‌be‌‌
used‌‌to‌‌adjust‌‌speech‌‌sound‌‌categories,‌‌Studying‌‌the‌‌effects‌‌of‌‌conceptual‌‌knowledge‌‌on‌‌color‌‌
perception‌‌is‌‌closely‌‌related‌‌to‌‌the‌‌Stroop,‌‌the‌‌Stroop‌‌paradigm,‌‌two‌‌sources‌‌of‌‌information‌‌may‌‌
be‌‌congruent‌‌and‌‌the‌‌interference‌‌caused‌‌by‌‌conflicting‌‌information‌‌reveals‌‌the‌‌interactions‌‌
between‌‌processing‌‌of‌‌these‌‌different‌‌sources‌‌of‌‌information.‌‌The‌‌results‌‌of‌‌the‌‌study‌‌
demonstrate‌‌a‌‌semantic‌‌effect‌‌on‌‌color‌‌categorization‌‌These‌‌results‌‌demonstrate‌‌a‌‌semantic‌‌
effect‌‌on‌‌color‌‌catego-rization,‌‌if‌‌ambiguous‌‌colors‌‌were‌‌presented‌‌in‌‌the‌‌con-text‌‌of‌‌a‌‌word,‌‌
categorization‌‌of‌‌the‌‌color‌‌was‌‌biased‌‌in‌‌the‌‌direction‌‌of‌‌the‌‌typical‌‌color‌‌of‌‌the‌‌picture.‌‌That‌‌is,‌‌
participants'‌‌semantic‌‌knowledge‌‌of‌‌the‌‌typical‌‌color‌‌of‌‌common‌‌objects‌‌shifted‌‌the‌‌percep-tion‌‌
of‌‌ambiguous‌‌colors‌‌to‌‌be‌‌closer‌‌to‌‌the‌‌typical‌‌color‌‌for‌‌that‌‌target.‌ ‌
3.Disentangling‌‌semantic‌‌and‌‌response‌‌learning‌‌effects‌‌‌in‌‌color-word‌‌contingency‌‌learning.‌‌
Geukes‌‌S,‌‌Vorberg‌‌D,‌‌Zwitserlood‌‌P‌‌(2019).‌‌Colour-code‌‌contingency‌‌learning‌‌is‌‌a‌‌phenomenon‌‌
in‌‌which‌‌it‌‌is‌‌easier‌‌to‌‌decipher‌‌the‌‌ink‌‌colour‌‌of‌‌a‌‌neutral‌‌coloured‌‌noun‌‌presented‌‌in‌‌colour‌‌in‌‌
which‌‌it‌‌has‌‌been‌‌frequently‌‌shown‌‌before‌‌as‌‌compared‌‌to‌‌colour‌‌in‌‌which‌‌it‌‌has‌‌been‌‌shown‌‌less‌‌
often.‌‌It‌‌remains‌‌unanswered‌‌if‌‌the‌‌participants‌‌learn‌‌semantic‌‌(word-colour)‌‌association‌‌or‌‌
response‌‌(word-button)‌‌association.‌‌Four‌‌experiments‌‌were‌‌conducted‌‌to‌‌investigate‌‌mechanism‌‌
underlying‌‌colour‌‌word‌‌contingency‌‌learning‌‌in‌‌a‌‌colour‌‌matching‌‌task.‌‌In‌‌each‌‌of‌‌
them.Pseudowords‌‌were‌‌associated‌‌with‌‌either‌‌a‌‌particular‌‌colour‌‌or‌‌a‌‌particular‌‌response‌‌button‌‌
position‌‌or‌‌both.‌‌The‌‌data‌‌gathered‌‌showed‌‌no‌‌influence‌‌of‌‌explicit‌‌contingency‌‌awareness.‌‌
However,‌‌there‌‌was‌‌clear‌‌evidence‌‌of‌‌the‌‌occurrence‌‌of‌‌both‌‌semantic‌‌learning‌‌and‌‌response‌‌
learning.‌‌The‌‌experiment‌‌added‌‌vital‌‌evidence‌‌that‌‌was‌‌lacking‌‌as‌‌of‌‌now,‌‌viz.‌‌When‌‌
associations‌‌are‌‌learnt‌‌in‌‌an‌‌incidental‌‌way.‌‌Semantic‌‌learning‌‌takes‌‌place‌‌more‌‌efficiently.‌ ‌
In‌‌principle,‌‌the‌‌longer‌‌time‌‌subjects‌‌needed‌‌to‌‌respond‌‌to‌‌the‌‌undesirable‌‌traits‌‌could‌‌be‌‌due‌‌to‌‌
two‌‌quite‌‌different‌‌mechanisms.‌‌Our‌‌account‌‌postulates‌‌perceptual‌‌vigilance:‌‌Undesir-able‌‌traits‌‌
require‌‌more‌‌time‌‌in‌‌the‌‌color-naming‌‌task‌‌because‌‌negatively‌‌valenced‌‌stimuli‌‌are‌‌automatically‌‌
attended.‌‌In‌‌general,‌‌the‌‌material‌‌that‌‌subjects‌‌attend‌‌to‌‌during‌‌the‌‌presentation‌‌will‌‌be‌‌recalled‌‌
better(e.g.,‌‌Fisk‌‌&‌‌Schneider,‌‌1984).‌‌If‌‌attention‌‌is‌‌indeed‌‌diverted‌‌away‌‌from‌‌the‌‌color-naming‌‌
task‌‌to‌‌undesirable‌‌traits,‌‌as‌‌the‌‌vigilance‌‌account‌‌suggests,‌‌some‌‌incidental‌‌learning‌‌of‌‌these‌‌
traits‌‌should‌‌occur,‌‌and‌‌recall‌‌should‌‌be‌‌greater‌‌for‌‌undesirable‌‌than‌‌for‌‌desirable‌‌traits.‌‌The‌‌
color‌‌responses‌‌to‌‌the‌‌undesirable‌‌traits‌‌may‌‌have‌‌been‌‌slower‌‌because‌‌the‌‌cognitive‌‌effort‌‌was‌‌
required‌‌to‌‌keep‌‌their‌‌undesirable‌‌content‌‌out‌‌of‌‌consciousness.‌‌The‌‌notion‌‌of‌‌defensiveness‌‌
implies‌‌a‌‌process‌‌motivated‌‌by‌‌the‌‌need‌‌to‌‌avoid‌‌the‌‌disturbing‌‌effect‌‌associated‌‌with‌‌particular‌‌
stimuli‌‌or‌‌memories‌‌(see‌‌Holmes,‌‌1974,‌‌for‌‌a‌‌review).‌‌One‌‌type‌‌of‌‌repression,‌‌called‌‌primal‌‌
repression‌‌or‌‌perceptual‌‌defense,‌‌implies‌‌that‌‌threatening‌‌material‌‌is‌‌kept‌‌from‌‌entering‌‌
consciousness.‌‌A‌‌second‌‌type,‌‌repression‌‌proper,‌‌suggests‌‌that‌‌after‌‌the‌‌material‌‌has‌‌been‌‌
consciously.‌‌recognized,‌‌it‌‌is‌‌relegated‌‌to‌‌the‌‌unconscious.‌‌As‌‌the‌‌stimuli‌‌in‌‌our‌‌color-naming‌‌
tasks‌‌are‌‌not‌‌presented‌‌subliminally,‌‌either‌‌type‌‌of‌‌defense‌‌could‌‌be‌‌involved.‌‌Nonetheless,‌‌both‌‌
types‌‌lead‌‌to‌‌the‌‌same‌‌prediction:‌‌The‌‌more‌‌threatening‌‌(undesirable)‌‌The‌‌material‌‌should‌‌be‌‌
particularly‌‌difficult‌‌to‌‌retrieve‌‌from‌‌memory.‌‌Predictions‌‌made‌‌in‌‌the‌‌experiment‌‌were‌‌that‌‌
undesirable‌‌trait‌‌words‌‌are‌‌said‌‌to‌‌cause‌‌more‌‌problems‌‌with‌‌the‌‌colour‌‌naming‌‌task‌‌than‌‌the‌‌
desirable‌‌trait‌‌words.‌‌Therefore,‌‌it‌‌is‌‌predicted‌‌that‌‌it‌‌would‌‌take‌‌longer‌‌for‌‌the‌‌participant‌‌to‌‌
name‌‌the‌‌colors‌‌of‌‌the‌‌undesirable‌‌trait‌‌words‌‌compared‌‌to‌‌the‌‌desirable‌‌trait‌‌words.‌‌Random‌‌
learning‌‌(said‌‌to‌‌occur‌‌without‌‌the‌‌student's‌‌intention)‌‌of‌‌the‌‌words‌‌was‌‌also‌‌expected‌‌to‌‌occur.‌‌
The‌‌participant‌‌tends‌‌to‌‌recall‌‌the‌‌undesirable‌‌trait‌‌words‌‌more‌‌than‌‌the‌‌desirable‌‌trait‌‌words.‌‌
The‌‌reasoning‌‌behind‌‌the‌‌hypothesis‌‌of‌‌the‌‌experiment‌‌is‌‌that‌‌there‌‌is‌‌a‌‌shift‌‌in‌‌attention‌‌when‌‌
something‌‌that‌‌is‌‌categorized‌‌as‌‌threatening‌‌comes‌‌in‌‌their‌‌vision,‌‌it‌‌diverts‌‌the‌‌attention‌‌to‌‌itself.‌‌
Meaning‌‌that‌‌when‌‌the‌‌participant‌‌is‌‌shown‌‌the‌‌sheet‌‌with‌‌undesirable‌‌words‌‌it‌‌takes‌‌time‌‌for‌‌
them‌‌to‌‌name‌‌the‌‌colours‌‌because‌‌their‌‌attention‌‌gets‌‌diverted‌‌to‌‌the‌‌word‌‌instead‌‌of‌‌the‌‌colour.‌‌
Moreover‌‌as‌‌the‌‌participants‌‌take‌‌longer‌‌to‌‌name‌‌the‌‌words,‌‌they‌‌sometimes‌‌unknowingly‌‌
remember‌‌the‌‌words‌‌and‌‌hence‌‌they‌‌might‌‌recall‌‌undesirable‌‌words‌‌more‌‌rather‌‌than‌‌the‌‌
desirable‌‌words.‌ ‌
‌
Aaliya 21 Software Engineering
CalmSecond year
Aayushi 18 BMS(1st year) She was happy and in a good mood
Afsara Biswas 19 SYBMS Nervous, Anxious
Akansha 21 TY Calm and Happy
Anirudh Hari 20 TYBA All good
Ansh Bahel 19 Second year (engineering)
Dizziness
Bhimanshu Sahu 20 TYBA Nervous, excited, curious
Charvak.Naik 20 TYBA happy.
Damini 20 TY - LAW Happy
Devanshi 20 TY Confused
Dholakia Yusaira 20 TYBA HAPPY
Dinesh Gawde 20 TY Neutral
Divya nakka 19 SYBA Neutral
Esha Nayar 19 FYBPT Calm
Gayatri Thakur 20 TYBMS Nervous
Hiti Khatwani 19 TYBCOM Good
Janavi Sayani 20 Third year good
Janhavi Mishra 21 3rd year ( btech) Good
Krisha 20 Tybcom Stable
Manav Aware 19 SYBA Happy, Content
Mansi Dubey 20 TY Bcom Neutral
Marjit 22 TYBA Great , rlaxed
Mayur Kotian 21 Graduate Nervous
Mihika 19 TYBA Participant felt good.
Neha Gavade 20 TYBA POLITICALProductive,
SCIENCE Creative.
Pratham Chavan 19 Second Year bachelors
Good in Science
Prutha 23 PG Normal
REEMA SUNIL 21 MBA Stable/Normal/Happy
Rushi 20 TY BTech pretty well
Sahil Raj Singh 21 Third year B.tech Neutral
student
Satwiki Deshmukh 19 TYBA feeling fine
Sejal Rajput 19 TYBA Literature Gloomy.
Sharmin 20 hospitality Nervous
Shazeen Khan 20 Second year in BDS
Normal
Shovan Das 21 TYBFM (BachelorHe
of was
financial
doingmarkets)
good.
Shruti Kapur 20 TY Nervous
Sonia Shah 20 TY-BBA In a good, happy state, but experienced feelings of stress due to continuous submissions in college.
Supriya 20 Third Year Happy
Tanvi Singh 20 TYBA Excited
Vamika Shetty 19 TYBA Nervous
Vedanti 19 SYBA Neutral
Vihaan 20 TYBA Neutral
20 TYBtech Good, he was relaxed
UDTT Time DTT Time Difference (UDTTDeviations
Time - DTT Time)Square DeviationsZ (UDTT Time) Z (DTT Time) Z (Diff)
145 70 75 69.063 4769.636937 2.50 -0.21 3.29
51.86 61.22 -9.36 -15.297 234.0117275 -1.11 -0.62 -0.73
68 64 4 -1.937 3.753680963 -0.48 -0.49 -0.09
96 57 39 33.063 1093.132751 0.60 -0.82 1.58
56.41 58.8 -2.39 -8.327 69.34628794 -0.93 -0.73 -0.40
90 60 30 24.063 579.0067042 0.37 -0.68 1.15
61 64 -3 -8.937 79.87786701 -0.75 -0.49 -0.43
51 71 -20 -25.937 672.7508903 -1.14 -0.16 -1.24
86 62 24 18.063 326.2560065 0.21 -0.59 0.86
52.62 57.89 -5.27 -11.207 125.6067531 -1.08 -0.78 -0.53
85 78 7 1.063 1.1290298 0.18 0.16 0.05
97 80 17 11.063 122.3801926 0.64 0.26 0.53
89 97 -8 -13.937 194.2522856 0.33 1.05 -0.66
112 115 -3 -8.937 79.87786701 1.22 1.89 -0.43
116.41 90.08 26.33 20.393 415.8564275 1.39 0.73 0.97
110 65 45 39.063 1525.883448 1.14 -0.45 1.86
110 120 -10 -15.937 254.0020531 1.14 2.13 -0.76
85 76 9 3.063 9.379262358 0.18 0.07 0.15
64 57 7 1.063 1.1290298 -0.64 -0.82 0.05
62 73 -11 -16.937 286.8769368 -0.71 -0.07 -0.81
30 60 -30 -35.937 1291.499727 -1.95 -0.68 -1.71
60 71 -11 -16.937 286.8769368 -0.79 -0.16 -0.81
127 120 7 1.063 1.1290298 1.80 2.13 0.05
62.6 77.4 -14.8 -20.737 430.0414949 -0.69 0.13 -0.99
71 55 16 10.063 101.2550763 -0.37 -0.91 0.48
30 30 0 -5.937 35.25321585 -1.95 -2.08 -0.28
82 54 28 22.063 486.7564717 0.06 -0.96 1.05
59 62 -3 -8.937 79.87786701 -0.83 -0.59 -0.43
50 58 -8 -13.937 194.2522856 -1.18 -0.77 -0.66
78 85 -7 -12.937 167.3774019 -0.10 0.49 -0.62
58.82 70.22 -11.4 -17.337 300.5868903 -0.84 -0.20 -0.83
105 93 12 6.063 36.7546112 0.95 0.86 0.29
75 81 -6 -11.937 142.5025182 -0.21 0.30 -0.57
64 57 7 1.063 1.1290298 -0.64 -0.82 0.05
101 106 -5 -10.937 119.6276345 0.79 1.47 -0.52
83 77 6 0.063 0.003913520822 0.10 0.12 0.00
74 64 10 4.063 16.50437864 -0.25 -0.49 0.19
97 82 15 9.063 82.12996003 0.64 0.35 0.43
123 142.8 -19.8 -25.737 662.4159135 1.65 3.19 -1.23
73 78 -5 -10.937 119.6276345 -0.29 0.16 -0.52
61 78 -17 -22.937 526.1262391 -0.75 0.16 -1.09
105 74 31 25.063 628.1318205 0.95 -0.02 1.19
102 52 50 44.063 1941.50903 0.83 -1.05 2.10
MEAN 5.937 SS 18495.515
Est. Variance (Pop) 440.369
Est. SD (Pop) 20.985
Est. SD (Samp. Dist.) 3.200
Crit. Value 5.38910234
t 1.855346487
UDTT Recall DTT Recall Difference Deviations Squared Deviations
Z (UDTT Recall) Z (DTT Recall) Z (Diff)
1 1 0 0.535 0.286225 -0.7291083103 -0.8111474582 0.2350367468
5 4 1 1.535 2.356225 1.088379072 0.3262223473 0.6744532734
1 1 0 0.535 0.286225 -0.7291083103 -0.8111474582 0.2350367468
4 4 0 0.535 0.286225 0.6340072263 0.3262223473 0.2350367468
0 0 0 0.535 0.286225 -1.183480156 -1.190270727 0.2350367468
3 5 -2 -1.465 2.146225 0.1796353808 0.7053456159 -0.6437963065
5 4 1 1.535 2.356225 1.088379072 0.3262223473 0.6744532734
4 3 1 1.535 2.356225 0.6340072263 -0.05290092119 0.6744532734
0 2 -2 -1.465 2.146225 -1.183480156 -0.4320241897 -0.6437963065
5 0 5 5.535 30.636225 1.088379072 -1.190270727 2.43211938
1 2 -1 -0.465 0.216225 -0.7291083103 -0.4320241897 -0.2043797798
0 2 [1] -2 -1.465 2.146225 -1.183480156 -0.4320241897 -0.6437963065
2 1 1 1.535 2.356225 -0.2747364647 -0.8111474582 0.6744532734
5 3 2 2.535 6.426225 1.088379072 -0.05290092119 1.1138698
1 3 -2 -1.465 2.146225 -0.7291083103 -0.05290092119 -0.6437963065
1 2 -1 -0.465 0.216225 -0.7291083103 -0.4320241897 -0.2043797798
5 4 1 1.535 2.356225 1.088379072 0.3262223473 0.6744532734
3 0 3 3.535 12.496225 0.1796353808 -1.190270727 1.553286327
1 3 -2 -1.465 2.146225 -0.7291083103 -0.05290092119 -0.6437963065
1 2 -1 -0.465 0.216225 -0.7291083103 -0.4320241897 -0.2043797798
6 [2] 4 [3] 2 2.535 6.426225 1.542750917 0.3262223473 1.1138698
10 10 0 0.535 0.286225 3.360238299 2.600961958 0.2350367468
0 1 -1 -0.465 0.216225 -1.183480156 -0.8111474582 -0.2043797798
0 2 -2 -1.465 2.146225 -1.183480156 -0.4320241897 -0.6437963065
3 2 1 1.535 2.356225 0.1796353808 -0.4320241897 0.6744532734
1 0 1 1.535 2.356225 -0.7291083103 -1.190270727 0.6744532734
3 4 -1 -0.465 0.216225 0.1796353808 0.3262223473 -0.2043797798
4 11 -7 -6.465 41.796225 0.6340072263 2.980085227 -2.84087894
2 0 2 2.535 6.426225 -0.2747364647 -1.190270727 1.1138698
1 3 -2 -1.465 2.146225 -0.7291083103 -0.05290092119 -0.6437963065
2 6 -4 -3.465 12.006225 -0.2747364647 1.084468884 -1.52262936
1 1 0 0.535 0.286225 -0.7291083103 -0.8111474582 0.2350367468
4 3 1 1.535 2.356225 0.6340072263 -0.05290092119 0.6744532734
4 3 1 1.535 2.356225 0.6340072263 -0.05290092119 0.6744532734
2 2 0 0.535 0.286225 -0.2747364647 -0.4320241897 0.2350367468
2 [4] 1 [5] 1 1.535 2.356225 -0.2747364647 -0.8111474582 0.6744532734
5 6 -1 -0.465 0.216225 1.088379072 1.084468884 -0.2043797798
6 7 -1 -0.465 0.216225 1.542750917 1.463592153 -0.2043797798
4 3 1 1.535 2.356225 0.6340072263 -0.05290092119 0.6744532734
0 2 -2 -1.465 2.146225 -1.183480156 -0.4320241897 -0.6437963065
4 11 -7 -6.465 41.796225 0.6340072263 2.980085227 -2.84087894
0 3 -3 -2.465 6.076225 -1.183480156 -0.05290092119 -1.083212833
0 4 -4 -3.465 12.006225 -1.183480156 0.3262223473 -1.52262936
-0.535 222.698
Var (Est. Pop.) 5.302
SD (Pop) 2.303
SD (Samp. Dist.) 0.351
Critical Value 0.5913451724
t -1.523212209
Individual data result and conclusion
The time taken by the participant for desirable trait words was 61.22 seconds and for undesirable
trait words was 51.86. The null hypothesis of undesirable traits reading not taking longer than
desirable traits was retained in this participant’s experiment. The confounding factors can be the
difference in the sequence of list presentation. The desirable trait words list was presented first
and the participant being exposed to this difficult task might have taken some time to get used to
it. Because of the undesirable traits being presented second, the participant was able to read it
quicker than the first list due to repeated exposure. Another factor that can affect the timings can
be the instructions not entirely understood by the participant fully. They caught a rhythm in the
first list by nodding and were asked to not do that, in the second list it was a smoother read than
the first one. The words recalled from both the trait list were equal, i.e. 1 word from the
undesirable trait’s list and 1 from the desirable trait’s list. Therefore, the null hypothesis of
undesirable trait words being recalled equal to the desirable trait list was retained. The trend of
null hypothesis being retained was observed. The eros made during the experiment was just
reading out the word and not color. It shows that the independent variable of undesirable trait
words and desirable trait words influences the dependent variable. Participants' mood was
nervous and it affected the experiment conduction in the first slide.
Post task questions response

A. No they haven't.
A. Yes it was fun.
A. That it was something psychological.
A. That the color displayed on the word was different than the word written .
5. Did you feel anxious at any point during the experiment? If so, explain.
A. Yes when they were told to recall the words, it was shocking.
6. Did you notice any difference in the words or how you named the colours on the 2 cards? If
yes, please explain.
A. No they did not.
7. Did the nature of the words make any difference to how fast you named their
colours and how well you remembered them? If yes, please explain how?
A. Yes the words written were different from the color given to them.
8. Did you find the words on any one card more distracting than the other? Did that
make it easier or more difficult to name the colours on any one card? If yes, please
explain how that affected your experience.
A. Yes they found the happy words (desirable traits) easier to read.
9. Did you anticipate that there would be another task following the colour-naming
task? If yes, how and what did you anticipate?
A. No they did not.
10. Did you experience any difficulty in recalling the words? If yes, specify.
A. Yes it was a shock for them.
11. Did you feel that some words were easier to remember or stood out among the
rest? If so, which were they and why do you think you remembered them better?
A. They found the happy words (desirable traits) easier to remember.
Group data results
The mean time taken to name the colours in context of undesirable trait words is higher than the
mean time taken to name the colours in the context of desirable trait words. (UDTT- 80.458,
DTT- 74.521) The mean number of undesirable trait words recalled are lower than the mean
number of desirable trait words recalled. (UDTT- 2.604, DTT- 3.139) The experiment is a
repeated measures design with one independent variable having 2 levels. Here each participant
was exposed to both the levels ie. desirable and undesirable trait words. The results are
statistically significant of the color-naming time for undesirable and desirable trait words of 43
participants. T-value is 1.855 and the degree of freedom is 42. The statistical significance is 5%
with the critical value of 5.389 and the t-cutoff is 1.684. The alternative hypothesis is thus
validated by the group data and is based on inferential statistics because the t- value lies in the
critical area of rejection and hence we reject the null hypothesis. The results are not statistically
significant of the recall scores for undesirable and desirable trait words of 43 participants.
T-value is -1.52 and the degree of freedom is 42. The statistical significance is 5% with the
critical value of 0.591 and the t-cutoff is 1.684. The alternative hypothesis is thus not validated
by the group data and is not based on the inferential statistics because t- value does not lie in the
critical area of rejection and hence we retain the null hypothesis. The confounding variables or
methodological errors in this experiment might be the experiment conduction being online, the
experimenter may have been late to stop their screen sharing, the screen containing a list of
desirable words, before the participant began to recall the words. The experimenter may have
practised the experiment with the participant before, hence the participant was more familiar
with the words. The participant may have been from a psychological background, meaning either
they were aware about the experiment, or were participants for it before. Some researchers have
identified the emotional Stroop task as an example of Automatic Vigilance (e.g., Pratto & John,
1991; Wentura, Rothermund, & Bak, 2000). In this task, subjects are asked to quickly name the
colors of various words, some of which are threatening (e.g., DISEASE) and others are neutral
(e.g., DISHPAN). In general, people are slower to name the colors of undesirable words than the
neutral words. However, a crucial problem with many of these studies is that the two word lists -
threat and control words - often differ with respect to critical linguistic parameters known to
contribute to reaction time differences in word recognition. For example, Larsen, Mercer, and
Balota (2004a) showed that, across 34 emotion Stroop studies, the undesirable words used were
more infrequent, of greater length, or had a larger orthographic neighborhood than the control
words. All of these purely linguistic features contribute to slower recognition of the threatening
words, casting doubt on the validity of the emotional Stroop effect being due to Automatic
Vigilance to the threat quotient of the word. In a recent paper, Algom, Chajut and Lev (2004)
reasoned that automatic vigilance should not be limited to color naming of words but should
apply to any cognitive activity. In a series of very carefully done experiments they demonstrated
that both color naming and word reading were slower for threatening than control words.
Conclusion : Total time taken to name the colors of the undesirable trait words are more than that
of desirable trait words, was validated by Group Data because the t value was 1.855 and the
degree of freedom was 42. The statistical significance was 5% with the critical value of 5.389
and t-cutoff is 1.684 which rejected the null hypothesis. The undesirable trait words are recalled
more than desirable trait words were not validated by the group data because the results were not
statistically significant. T-value is -1.52 and the degree of freedom is 42. The critical value is
0.591 with the significance level of 5% and t-cutoff value is 1.684, hence retaining the null
hypothesis.
27
B. False memory using the Roediger and McDermott paradigm.
TITLE: False memory using the Roediger and McDermott paradigm.
INTRODUCTION:
• What is Memory? (Types and models of memory- briefly – not more than one paragraph).
• Memory malleability and how it is participant to distortion. (How Human memory holds an
amazing amount of information, yet it is not just a storage device. Memory processes’
susceptible to distortion (see Schacter 2001). In particular, external suggestions, like post-
event information, like leading questions (Loftus and Palmer 1974) and conversations with
co-witnesses (Wright, Self and Justice,2000), or even remembering complete, detailed
events that never happened (Loftus and Pickrell1 995).
• Reconstructive nature of memory. (Combination of different traces to create a new
memory. A note on the 'misinformation effect' (see Davis and Loftus 2006; Loftus 2005)
• What are False memories? Evidence of false memories given by various researchers.
(Bartlett (1932/1997- The War of the Ghosts, Elizabeth Loftus and colleagues (Loftus &
Palmer, 1974). - eyewitness testimony).
• Deese, Roediger and McDermott task of creating false memory in lab (Roediger &
McDermott, 1995).
• Impact of modality of presentation on false memory (Smith and Hunt 1998)
PROBLEM
To study the effect of mode of presentation of material on inducement of false memory
HYPOTHESIS
Alternative Hypothesis
The Verbal mode of presentation of material yields higher inducement of false memory. That is,
The mean recognition scores of false memory is higher for verbal presentation than for visual
presentation of word list.
Null Hypothesis
The Verbal mode of presentation of material does not yield higher inducement of false memory.
That is, The mean recognition scores of false memory is not higher for verbal presentation; it is
lower or equal to that for visual presentation of word list.
OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS OF THE VARIABLES:

Independent Variable
Presentation list of words, varied at two levels Verbal and Visual.
Dependent Variable
Inducement of false memory, measured in terms of the mean recognition scores for false memory
for lure words not initially presented on the list
Control Variables
1. Exposure time of each word was 2 seconds
2. All the lists had the same number of words (12 words each)
3. The three lists were counterbalanced in presentation of 3 sets, such that one third of the
class followed set 1-the order of presentation being- list1, then 2 then 3, second third of
28
the class followed set 2 - the order of presentation being- list 2, then 3, then 1 and the last
third of the class followed set 3 - the order of presentation being, - list 3, then list 1 and
then list 2 respectively.
4. An interval of 12 unfilled seconds was given between the three lists.
5. Recognition list was constructed in blocks; there were 7 items per block, and each block
corresponded to a studied list (2 studied words, 2 related words, 2 unrelated words, and
the critical non studied lure). The order of the blocks corresponded to the order in which
lists had been studied. Each block of test items always began with a studied word and
ended with the critical lure; the other items were arranged haphazardly in between.
6. Three recognition sheets were prepared as per the 3 sets of word lists, such that the order
of blocks on the recognition sheets were similar to the order of lists presented.
METHOD:
Participants
Individual Data

Participant 1
Participant 2
Group Data
College Students: N=20 participants
Apparatus and Materials

1. Three lists from the materials listed in Deese's (1959) article (3 lists of associatively related
words)
2. Recognition sheet (The 21-item recognition test included 6 studied and 15 non studied
items. There were three types of non- studied items, or lures: (a) the 3 critical lure words,
from which the lists were generated (e.g., chair), (b) 6 words generally unrelated to any
items on the three lists, and (c) 6 words weakly related to the lists (2 per list). One of the
two studied words that were tested occurred in the first position of the study list (and
therefore was the strongest associate to the critical item); the other occurred somewhere
in the first 6 positions of the study list).
3. Stopwatch/Metronome
4. Stationery
5. Screen
DESIGN
Random groups design with one independent variable having 2 levels. Different participants are
exposed to the two levels (one is presented material through verbal means and the other through
visual means.
PROCEDURE
All the required materials were checked and arranged by the E. The participant was called inside
the laboratory and made to sit comfortably facing the wooden screen. A few general questions
were asked in order to build rapport, and then the following instructions were given.
29
Instructions for the first participant

“This is a simple experiment on memory process, I will read aloud a list of words, one at a time, at
the speed of one word per 2 seconds. Your task is to listen to each word carefully as you will be
tested for it later at the end of the experiment”. “After I finish reading the first list, I will give you a
small interval of a few seconds and then read the second list. After I finish reading the second list, I
will give you a small interval of a few seconds again and then read the third list. This way I will read
aloud three lists of words, one by one. Before starting the words on each list, I will specify the list
number. “Have you understood? Do you have any doubts”?
Instructions for the second participant
“This is a simple experiment on the memory process; I will present to you some cards that have a
word typed on it. Each card will be presented one at a time at the speed of one word per 2
seconds. Your task is to look at each word carefully as you will be tested for it later at the end of
the experiment. “After I finish showing the first list, I will give you a small interval of a few seconds
and then present the second list of words. After I finish showing the second list, I will give you a
small interval of a few seconds again and then present the third list. This way I will show you three
lists of words, one by one. Before starting the words on each list, I will specify the list number.
“Have you understood? Do you have any doubts”?
The experimenter presents the list of words from the first list at the rate of one word per two
seconds, followed by words from list two and then words from list three.
Once the E ensured that the P understood the instructions properly, the E started the experiment
by saying “Ready” followed by naming the list – “List – 1” and then reading/visually showing on
card the first word on that list, E continued reading aloud/ presenting the words on the list at the
speed of one word per 2 seconds. At the end of the first list, E gives a small unfilled break of 12
seconds. After 12 seconds, the E says, “Ready”, and then names the second list as “List – 2”, then
starts reading /visually showing on card(s), the second list, in the same way as the first (at the rate
of one word per 2 seconds). At the end of the second list, the same procedure is followed, a small
gap of unfilled 12 seconds is allowed to pass by, before E says “Ready” again, followed by naming
the third list as “List – 3”, and then reading aloud /visually showing on card(s), words on the list
one by one at the speed of one word per 2 seconds, till the list is completed.
Free recall test
"This part of the task involves a simple memory test. I will give you a sheet of paper, please write
down all the words you can remember from the three lists you heard/ seen in the last session on
that sheet. Their order is not important. You can write them as you remember them. You may
begin from the last few words or words from the first or the second list, as per your preference.
Please write the words vertically, one below the other. You have three minutes to recall all the
words you can. Do you have any questions?"
E answers any questions the participant may have. E sets the timer and instructs the P to start
recalling. After three minutes are over, the E stops the P and takes the sheet away.
Recognition test
"This is a simple recognition task. I will give you a sheet of paper, on which many words are
printed. Some of the words are from the three lists of words you heard/ saw in the first part of the
experiment, and there are many new words added to it. Your task is to indicate whether each
word is old (that is, on one of the lists you heard/saw previously) or new. You will write “O” if you
think the word is old and “N” if you think the word is new. This is self-paced, and you can take
your time (but it generally does not take longer than three minutes), but try to respond as
30
accurately as you can. Begin when I say “Start”, and let me know when you are done. Do you have
any questions? ".
E answers any questions the participant may have. E starts the recognition test and waits for the
participant to finish.
Post-task Questions
5. Do you remember seeing/ hearing all the words that you recalled / recognized or you just
know they were there?
6. Could you observe any pattern or theme in the words on the lists?
7. Did you feel confused about whether or not a word was presented to you earlier while
recognizing words?
DEBRIEFING
The purpose of this experiment was to study human memory to test its fallibility and whether it is
participant to false memories or not. In this experiment, the term false memories is used to
characterize the recall of events that never occurred or in other words remembering words that
were never shown in the list. The purpose is also to Study the effect of mode of presentation of
material on inducement of false memory, that is to know whether visual mode of material
presentation or auditory mode of material presentation leads to more false memory.
This experiment had two participants, one was shown the words one by one and the other heard
the same words. The words that appeared in a list were closely associated to another word that
was included in the recognition sheet but which was not actually seen / heard by the participant
when the words were exposed initially. Recognizing those unseen/ unheard words as being on the
list would be evidence of false memory. Sharing the scores obtained by the participant, explain if
evidence of false memory was observable.
This experiment was first performed by Roediger and McDermott in which they found that human
memory was highly reconstructive in nature and therefore participant to false memories. Work by
Smith and Hunt shows that visually presented material leads to lesser false memory scores than
verbally presented material. One explanation of why false memories are created for words not
shown/ read is that when we see or hear a word, it causes semantic activation. According to
activation theories, words are linked to one another in a network, and the activation of one lexical
concept results in the spread of activation to surrounding concepts (Collins & Loftus, 1975).
Studying a list of semantically related items will thus result in strong activation of an item (i.e., the
critical lure- use the critical lure that the P remembered/ recognized) associated to all list items.
Consequently, the critical lure may be falsely remembered due to the heightened activation.
Understanding that false memories can arise is essential, particularly in the clinical and forensic
context. Since many decisions and judgments that might impact mental health and /or future life
of people may be based on what people say they remember from memory, production of false
memories may compromise the reliability of the reports and testimonies of patients, suspects or
victims of crime. Thus, it is possible for patients, suspects or victims of crime to report
information/events in a different way from reality, unintentionally distorting facts, conditioning
31
and compromising their veracity. Currently, the occurrence of false memories is a phenomenon
widely investigated in forensic psychology since the majority of the judicial systems worldwide use
eye-witness as a source for decision making.
ANALYSIS OF DATA
Individual Data
1. Responses of participant from recall sheet were recorded in Table 1
2. Responses of participant from recognition sheet were recorded in Table 2
3. A bar graph was drawn to depict No. of false memory scores on visual compared to verbal.
(Figure 1)
Table 1: Comparison of Hit rate and False memory scores in recall task for Verbal and Visual
presentation of Words
Verbal presentation of list Visual presentation of list

Hit rate (words False memory Hit rate (words False memory
correctly (recall of words correctly (recall of words
recalled) not present on recalled) not present on
the list) the list)
List 1
List 2
List 3
Total
Mean
Table 2: Comparison of Hit rate and False memory scores in recognition task for Verbal and
Visual presentation of Words

Hit rate (max False memory Hit rate (max False memory
6) (max 3) 6) (max 3)
List 1
List 2
List 3
Total
Mean
Group Data:
1. Totals of false memory scores obtained through recognition were tabulated for 20
participants for both Verbal as well as visual mode of material presentation and were
presented in Table 2 and a calculation of one tailed t-test was shown below the table.
2. A bar graph was drawn to depict the mean false memory scores for both Verbal as well as
visual mode of material presentation. (Figure 2)
32
Table 3: Comparative analysis of False memory scores for Verbal and Visual presentation of
Words of 20 participants and the calculation of t value
Participants False memory score for False memory score for

1
2
3
.
.
.
20
Total
Mean
Individual data
Comment on the Recalled words. Is there evidence of false memory observed?

On the basis of Table1 (from recognition sheet), comment on the number of words falsely
remembered by the P as having seen in the first part of the experiment. Compare with hit rate and
state the honesty with which the P had responded in the experiment. (Dishonest if all or most
words are marked as “old”, in order to get 100% hit rate.)
Compare the false memory scores of all the three lists and comment on the total scores and
means of verbal and visual false memory scores. State the mode of presentation that yields higher
false memory
Comment on the number of false memory words recalled. How many words were correctly
recalled? Comment on the critical lures recalled. Is there evidence of false memory? Was the
number of correctly recalled words for verbal same or different from the correctly recalled words
for visual? Were falsely recalled words in verbal condition same or different from the visual
condition? Then discuss relevant theory or research. If contrary findings are observed, discuss
methodological issues or confounding factors relevant explaining the trend.
Which false memory scores are higher-Verbal or visual? Is the trend as expected? Provide theory
basis to support the results (Smith and Hunt 1998). If contrary trend observed, discuss the
confounding factors operated during the conduct.
Discuss whether the trends in the individual data were consistent with the Null Hypothesis or not?
Any factors operating during the conduct affecting the results? Discuss whether controls were in
place or not? Did attitude and emotional state of participant during the participation influence
the results in any way?
Incorporate PTQs to explain the trends observed.
Provide relevant theory and research to augment the results obtained.
33
Group data
Is the mean false memory score for verbally presented words higher than the mean false memory
score for visually presented words?
Which inferential statistical technique would you use to analyse the group data and why? Provide
reasons.
Are the results statistically significant? Report t values with degree of freedom and statistical
significance. Report the results as per APA format.
Is the alternative hypothesis validated by the group data or not based on the inferential statistics?
Provide relevant theoretical or research basis. If the group data is not as expected, provide
confounding factors or explain methodological issues (results may change if rate of presentation of
words is changed/ results may be affected if more lists are included, the longer the list the better
the false memory scores. Most importantly we have no way of knowing for sure whether dual
encoding operated or not. i.e., when verbally presented, the participant could have visualized the
word too and vice versa) of the experiment.
Evaluate the experiment on the basis of internal validity, external validity, experimental realism,
and mundane realism. Give recent researches. Any suggestions for improvement.
CONCLUSION
The main trends in the Individual Data were/were not consistent with the relevant past research
and theories for false memory scores of visual and verbal presentation of words.
The hypothesis that mean recognition scores of false memory after verbal presentation of word
list will be higher than the mean recognition scores of false memory after visual presentation of
word list, was/was not validated by the Group Data, on the basis of the obtained t value and its
significance.
REFERENCE
Roediger, H.L., & McDermott, K.B. (1995). Creating false memories: Remembering words not
presented in lists. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 803-
814.
Roediger, H., Watson, J., McDermott, K. and Gallo, D., 2001. Factors that determine false recall: A
multiple regression analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8(3), pp.385-407.
McDermott KB. The Persistence of False Memories in List Recall. J Mem Lang. 1996;35(2):212–
230. [Google Scholar]
Smith RE, Hunt RR. Presentation modality affects false memory. Psychon Bull Rev. 1998;5(4):710–
715. [Google Scholar]
Gallo DA, McDermott KB, Percer JM, Roediger HL., III Modality effects in false recall and false
recognition. J Exp Psychol: Learn Mem Cogn. 2001;27(2):339–353. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/psychology/false-memory
APPENDIX
List 1:
TABLE, SIT, LEGS, SEAT, SOFT, DESK, ARM, SOFA, WOOD, CUSHION, REST, STOOL.
Critical lure: Chair
List 2:
BED, REST, AWAKE, TIRED, DREAM, WAKE, NIGHT, BLANKET, DOZE, SLUMBER, SNORE, PILLOW.
Critical lure: Sleep
34
List 3:
RIPE, CITRUS, VEGETABLE, JUICE, BANANA, ORANGE,
BASKET, BOWL, SALAD, PEAR, APPLE, CHERRY.
Critical lure: Fruit
SET 1 – List 1, 2 & 3
SET 2 – List 2, 3 & 1
SET 3 – List 3, 1 & 2
Recognition sheet – set 1
TABLE BED RIPE

TARGET ALARM CEMENT
FLOOR FIGHT SALAD
SAND DINNER BAKE
WOOD ROAD SEED
SLOUCH NIGHT TREE
CHAIR SLEEP FRUIT
BED RIPE TABLE

ALARM CEMENT TARGET
FIGHT SALAD FLOOR
DINNER BAKE SAND
ROAD SEED WOOD
NIGHT TREE SLOUCH
SLEEP FRUIT CHAIR
RIPE TABLE BED

CEMENT TARGET ALARM
SALAD FLOOR FIGHT
BAKE SAND DINNER
SEED WOOD ROAD
TREE SLOUCH NIGHT
FRUIT CHAIR SLEEP
35
False memory using the Roediger and McDermott paradigm – Checklists
Instructions/Conduct 10 marks each, total 20 marks
*Supervise instructions for any one P during the examination. Ensure card set & instructions for
the other P are correct
Sn Instructions -10 marks Marks

I Instructions for the first participant
1 “This is a simple experiment on memory process, I will read aloud a list of words, 0.5
one at a time, at the speed of one word per 2 seconds.
2 Your task is to listen to each word carefully as you will be tested for it later at the 0.5
end of the experiment
3 After I finish reading the first list, I will give you a small interval of a few seconds 1.5
and then read the second list.
After I finish reading the second list, I will give you a small interval of a few
seconds again and then read the third list.
This way I will read aloud three lists of words, one by one
4 Before starting the words on each list, I will specify the list number. “Have you 0.5
understood? Do you have any doubts
5 The E again briefly summarized the instructions. Then the P asked to repeat major 01
points of the instructions to ensure that the P has understood them.
II Instructions for the second participant
1 This is a simple experiment on the memory process; I will present to you some
cards that have a word typed on it. Each card will be presented one at a time at the
speed of one word per 2 seconds.
2 Your task is to look at each word carefully as you will be tested for it later at the
end of the experiment.
3 After I finish showing the first list, I will give you a small interval of a few seconds
and then present the second list of words.
After I finish showing the second list, I will give you a small interval of a few
seconds again and then present the third list.
This way I will show you three lists of words, one by one.
4 Before starting the words on each list, I will specify the list number. “Have you
understood? Do you have any doubts?
5 The E again briefly summarized the instructions. Then the P asked to repeat major
points of the instructions to ensure that the P has understood them.
III Instructions for Free recall test – P 1
1 01
I will give you a sheet of paper, please write down as many words you can
remember from the three lists you heard in the last session on that sheet.
2 Their order is not important. You can write them as you remember them. You may 01
begin from the last few words or words from the first or the second list, as per
your preference.
3 Please write the words vertically, one below the other. You have three minutes to 01
recall as many words you can. Do you have any questions?
IV
Instructions for Recognition test – P 1
1 This is a simple recognition task. I will give you a sheet of paper, on which many
words are printed.
36
2 Some of the words are from the three lists of words you heard in the first part of
the experiment, and there are many new words added to it.
3 Your task is to indicate whether each word is old (that is, on one of the lists you
heard/saw previously) or new. You will write “O” if you think the word is old and
“N” if you think the word is new.
4 This is self-paced, and you can take your time (but it generally does not take longer
than three minutes), but try to respond as accurately as you can.
5 Begin when I say “Start”, and let me know when you are done. Do you have any
questions?
V Instructions for Free recall test – P 2
1 I will give you a sheet of paper, please write down as many words you can
remember from the three lists you saw in the last session on that sheet.
2 Their order is not important. You can write them as you remember them. You may
begin from the last few words or words from the first or the second list, as per
your preference.
3 Please write the words vertically, one below the other. You have three minutes to
recall as many words you can. Do you have any questions?
VI Instructions for Recognition test – P 2
1 This is a simple recognition task. I will give you a sheet of paper, on which many 0.5
words are printed.
2 Some of the words are from the three lists of words you saw in the first part of the 0.5
experiment, and there are many new words added to it.
3 Your task is to indicate whether each word is old (that is, on one of the lists you 01
heard/saw previously) or new. You will write “O” if you think the word is old and
“N” if you think the word is new.
4 This is self-paced, and you can take your time (but it generally does not take longer 0.5
than three minutes), but try to respond as accurately as you can.
5 Begin when I say “Start”, and let me know when you are done. Do you have any 0.5
questions?
Deductions
1 All instructions given, but sequence altered 0.5

Fumbled 0.5
had to refer to the notes 0.5
2 Any other error – depending on severity – range 0.5 to 2 marks
10.0 – deductions = Final Marks of Instructions
Conduct
I Conduct – P 1
1 Word lists 1, 2 and 3 were presented, at the rate of one word per two seconds, one 0.5
after the other
2 E said “Ready” – named it as “List – 1” and then read the first word on that list, 0.5
continued the list at the speed of one word per 2 seconds
3 After finishing List 1, a small unfilled break of 12 seconds given. 0.5
0.5
4 E said “Ready” – named it as “List – 2” and then read the first word on that list,
37

6 E said “Ready” – named it as “List – 3” and then read the first word on that list, 0.5
8 The unfilled interval of 12 secs was measured correctly for all the 3 trials 0.5
II Conduct – P 2
1 It was ensured that the presentation was visual and all the other procedure was
meticulously followed
III Conduct – recall task – only P 1 to be supervised
1 The P is given Pencil and a sheet of paper 0.5
3 The time given is 3 minutes. If the P returns the sheet before time, the P is told that 0.5
there is some more time. If the P insists on returning the sheet, the time taken for
the task is carefully noted
IV Conduct – recognition task – only P 2 to be supervised
1 The P is given the recognition sheet 0.5
3 Although it is a self - paced task, the P is requested to return the sheet as early as 0.5
possible after 3 mins are over.
4 Debriefing 3.0
Total 10.0
Deductions
Conduct not smooth 01

Stop watch error 0.5
Any other error- depending on severity – range 0.5 to 2 marks
10.0 – deductions = Final Marks Conduct
Any other observation/Comment:

Abstract
A false memory is a recollection that seems real in your mind but is fabricated in part or in
whole. Most false memories aren’t malicious or even intentionally hurtful. They’re shifts or
reconstructions of memory that don’t align with the true events. However, some false memories
can have significant consequences, including in court or legal settings where false memories may
convict someone wrongfully. A person's mind might fill in the "gaps" by forming memories that
did not actually occur. A false memory is a fabricated or distorted recollection of an event. Such
memories may be entirely false and imaginary. In other cases, they may contain elements of fact
that have been distorted by interfering information or other memory distortions.
Introduction
Memory is an active system that receives information through the senses, converts that
information to a usable form, organizes it while storing it, and then retrieves the information
from the storage. There are two major types of memories, Individual Memory and Collective
Memory. Individual Memory refers to a personal interpretation of events of one's own life. It
includes 2 subtypes, a. Explicit Memory consists of Episodic, Semantic, and Autobiographical
Memory and b. Implicit Memory consisting of Procedural, Priming, and Perceptual Memory.
Collective Memory can be defined as a shared pool of memories, knowledge and information by
more than two people or a group of people. It also has two subtypes: Communicative Memory
and Cultural Memory. Briefly, multiple memory systems models include models such as
Atkinson & Shiffrin, 1968 model which presents LTM as a single store. It is based on the
assumption that each type of memory receives, processes, and stores information differently.
Squire's Model that distinguished declarative memory (or explicit) from procedural memory (or
implicit). Tulving's Model, long-term memory is made up of two distinct yet intertwined
systems: semantic memory and episodic memory. Extra knowledge, beliefs, and data can invade
memories and may even permanently change them and this phenomenon is known as Memory
Malleability. Memory is far from being a verbatim record of the past, as it is well known to be a
reconstructive process full of distortions and errors. Distortions in memory can have serious
ramifications in everyday life. Memory biases affect the recall of memories by altering the
content of what we remember. As a result of these memory distortions, memories are not stored
as exact replicas of reality. Memory has been found to be fragile and error-prone (Schacter,
2001). External suggestions such as given in a study by loftus and Palmer 1974 like post event
information, leading questions and conversations with co-witnesses (Wright, Self and
Justice,2000), or even remembering complete, detailed events that never happened (Loftus and
Pickrell 1995) have a key role in memory distortions. Human memory holds an amazing amount
of information, according to a 2010 article in Scientific American, the average adult human brain
has the ability to store the equivalent of 2.5 million gigabytes of digital memory and yet it is not
a storage device. Memory does not work like a video recording, meaning that our memories of
an event are often incomplete, as we only recall the important points.Reconstructive memory
suggests that in the absence of all information, we fill in the gaps to make more sense of what
happened. According to Barlett, we do this using schemas. These are our previous knowledge
and experience of a situation and we use this process to complete the memory. This means that
our memories are a combination of specific traces encoded at the time of the event, along with
our knowledge, expectations, beliefs and experiences of such an event. The misinformation
effect refers to the tendency for post-event information to interfere with the memory of the
primary event. This effect occurs when an individual's recall of episodic memories becomes less
accurate due to post-event information. It has been studied since the mid-1970s. Elizabeth Loftus
is one among the foremost influential researchers within the field.The misinformation effect
illustrates how easily memories are often influenced. It also raises concerns about the reliability
of memory—particularly when the memories of eyewitnesses (eyewitness testimony) is used to
figure out criminal guilt. The misinformation effect can cause inaccurate memories and, in some
cases, end within the formation of false memories.
False memory is a psychological phenomenon whereby an individual recalls either an
actual occurrence substantially differently from the way it transpired, or an event that never even
happened. It is a fabricated or distorted recollection of an event. Such memories may be entirely
false and imaginary. In other cases they may contain elements of fact that have been distorted by
interfering information or other memory distortions.False memories are distinct from other types
of memory failures in that they constitute a clear recollection of something that did not actually
happen. It's not about forgetting or mixing up specifics of things that have already happened; it's
about remembering things that are never experienced before. False memory differs from simple
memory errors, it is more than simple mistake it involves a level of certitude in the validity of the
memory. Some factors influencing false memories are misinformation, misattribution of the
original source of information as well as existing knowledge and memory. Study done by Bartlett
(1932/1997- The War of the Ghosts gives significant evidence of false memories which included
how prior knowledge of the one thing affects or creates the distortion in the original version of
the story. According to Bartlett, memory is an imaginative reconstruction of a past experience of
the person's life while the person reconstructs it by trying to fit into present existing schemas.
Elizabeth Loftus studies of "misinformation effect" showed that people who witness an event and
are later exposed to new and misleading information about it, the recollections often become
distorted. Another Study conducted by Elizabeth Loftus & her associate Jacqueline E. Pickrell
(1995) gives evidence that people can be led to remember their past in different ways, they can
even be coaxed into "remembering" entire events that never happened. The famous psychology
research by Loftus and Palmer (1974) Automobile Destruction Reconstruction illustrates how
eyewitness testimony can be unreliable and affected by leading questions resulting in constant
restructuring and alteration of information. This research suggests that memory is easily distorted
by questioning technique and information acquired after the event can merge with original
memory causing inaccurate recall or reconstructive memory.
The Deese-Roediger-McDermott (DRM) paradigm is a well-elaborated strategy . The

Deese, Roediger and McDermott (DRM) task is a false memory paradigm in which subjects are
presented with lists of semantically related words (e.g., nurse, hospital, etc.) at encoding. After a
delay, subjects are asked to recall or recognize these words. In the recognition memory version
of the task, subjects are asked whether they remember previously presented words, as well as
related (but never presented) critical lure words like 'doctor'. Typically, the critical word is
recognized with high probability and confidence. This likelihood of falsely remembering the
non-presented critical items can be reduced by presenting studied associates visually rather than
auditorily (Smith & Hunt, 1998). This is referred to as the modality effect in false memory. In
1998 Smith and Hunt reported three experiments demonstrating that false recall and recognition
in the DRM paradigm could be dramatically reduced by presenting the items visually rather than
auditorily. They argued that the effect of visual study presentation on false memory relies upon
the encoding and retrieval of distinctive information. Research using the DRM task has found
that the modalities—specifically visual or auditory—in which information is encoded and tested
can affect rates of false memory.
[P1] Name (As given by the
[P1]
participant,
Age as given by participant.
[P1] Class Use pseudonyms
[P1]
if the
Emotional
participant
State
didn't mention anything)
Mayur 21 TY Unwell
Bhimanshu Sahu 20 TYBA Good
Vamika Shetty 19 TYBA Calm
Nandaram 20 BSc Nervous
Samreen 20 TYBCOM Nervous
Shivani 23 FYPGDM Excited
Akshita Gagrani 20 2nd year Good
Sanjna Bhalla 24 Employed happy
SAKET GUPTA 20 2nd YEAR Nervous
Dishika 19 TYBMM Neutral
Yashna Koshe 22 5th year BLS LLB good
Bhumit 21 Tybsc Exam stress, otherwise said was doing good
Zeba 27 Employed Excited
Raiba Anjali Dileep 23 Free Lancer Normal
Sanjeevani Patil 21 TYBA happy and comfortable
Neha Gavade 20 TYBLSLLB Neutral
Manvi Jain 21 graduated jolly
Sakshi 20 TYBA Neutral
Anurag Kurmi 25 Employed Neutral
Maarefa Maredia 20 TYBA Excited
Shovan Das 21 TY BFM Good
Shail Choksi 20 TY Happy
Kriti Singhvi 20 TYBcom Good
Kriti Singhvi 20 TYBcom Good
Prachiti 20 Tyba She was good
Ekta Dagade 19 Tybsc Good
Ritika Goswami 20 TYBA neutral
Samriddhi 20 TY Happy
Rohit Kadam 20 TYBA Feeling good
Manvie Agarwal 20 TYBA normal, good
Qureshi Zainab 20 TY Nervous
Sahil Raj Singh 21 TY B.tech Neutral
Yash Panchal 20 TY computer engineering Neutral
Mihir 20 FYBA Happy
Riddhi Jalgaonkar 20 SYBA Happy
Tanvi Hindlekar 20 Graduate "I am feeling good"
Soham Ballal 20 MA English Literature Good
Dhruv 19 SYBA Good
Diya 20 TYBMM Happy
Kanika 20 TYBAF Good
Tanmay desai 21 Graduate Good
Sharmin Damani 20 SY Nervous
Yusaira Dholakia 20 TYBA Calm
Moin khan 21 MBBS third year Normal
False memory False memory
Hit rate (recall of Hit rate (recall of
(words words not (words words not
correctly present on correctly present on
recalled) the list) recalled) the list)
List 1 9 0 5 0
List 2 7 0 8 0
List 3 5 0 8 0
Total 21 0 21 0
Mean 7 0 7 0

Hit rate (max False memory Hit rate (max False memory
6) (max 3) 6) (max 3)
List 1 3 1 1 1
List 2 3 1 2 1
List 3 2 1 1 1
Total 8 3 4 3
Mean 2.667 1 1.334 1

P. No. Verbal Presentation
Squared
Score DeviationVisual
1 Presentation
Squared
Score Deviation 2
1 2 0.149 2 0.529
2 2 0.149 4 1.620
3 1 1.922 3 0.074
4 2 0.149 2 0.529
5 2 0.149 1 2.983
6 2 0.149 3 0.074
7 3 0.377 3 0.074
8 3 0.377 3 0.074
9 3 0.377 3 0.074
10 2 0.149 3 0.074
11 3 0.377 3 0.074
12 2 0.149 2 0.529
13 3 0.377 3 0.074
14 3 0.377 3 0.074
15 3 0.377 2 0.529
16 3 0.377 3 0.074
17 3 0.377 8 27.802
18 2 0.149 2 0.529
19 2 0.149 0 7.438
20 3 0.377 3 0.074
21 3 0.377 3 0.074
22 3 0.377 9 39.347
23 2 0.149 3 0.074
24 2 0.149 3 0.074
25 2 0.149 3 0.074
26 3 0.377 2 0.529
27 3 0.377 0 7.438
28 3 0.377 3 0.074
29 2 0.149 3 0.074
30 2 0.149 9 39.347
31 2 0.149 2 0.529
32 3 0.377 1 2.983
33 2 0.149 1 2.983
34 3 0.377 3 0.074
35 3 0.377 2 0.529
36 3 0.377 2 0.529
37 3 0.377 1 2.983
38 0 5.695 0 7.438
39 0 5.695 1 2.983
40 2 0.149 3 0.074
41 2 0.149 1 2.983
42 3 0.377 2 0.529
43 3 0.377 3 0.074
44 2 0.149 4 1.620
Total 24.432 156.727
Mean 2.386 2.727
Est. Pop Var. 0.568 3.645
Pooled Pop. Var. 2.107
Pooled Pop. SD 1.451
Sqrt(1/n1 + 1/n2) 0.216
Sampling Dist. SD 0.313
Diff. between means (Verbal-0.341
- Visual)
t -1.089123106
p ns
Individual data result
The null hypothesis was rejected in this experiment. Verbal presentation did yield a
higher score than visual presentation. The mean score of verbal presentation recognition was
2.667 whereas the visual presentation was 1.334. In recall scores however, the null hypothesis
was retained because the mean score of visual presentation was equal to verbal presentation.Both
were 7.
Post-task questions

5. Do you remember seeing/ hearing all the words that you recalled / recognized or
you just know they were there?
6. Could you observe any pattern or theme in the words on the lists?
7. Did you feel confused about whether or not a word was presented to you earlier
while recognizing words?
Verbal presentation participant:
1. No they havent
2. It tested their attention.
3. They didnt remember but recognised them.
4. To test their memory.
5. They felt a theme.
6. Yes.
7. Yes
Visual presentation participant:
1. No but they know about memory tests.

2. It was challenging.
3. Not really.
4. To test their memory.
5. No not really.
6. Yes they observed a night time theme in the last list.
7. Yes they didnt recognise few words shown.
Group data result
Total of 88 participants were analysed for the group data. The mean score on false
memory for the verbally presented words was 2.386 and the visually presented word was 2.727.
Hence, the mean false memory score for verbally presented words was greater than visually
presented words. The inferential statistical technique used to analyse the scores was Independent
Sample t- test, as the design of the experiment was random measures design and it had 2 sets of
samples. The calculated t value (-1.089) was smaller than the t cut-off (1.664) at p = 0.05 (5%)
for one tailed t test. The alternative hypothesis is thus not validated by the group data and is not
based on the inferential statistics because t- value does not lie in the critical area of rejection.
Hence, we retain our null hypothesis.
38
E. One Psychological Test

1. Administration, Scoring and Interpretation of the Test
2. Writing report on the findings of the test
3. Calculate Reliability / Validity of the test
PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTING
TITLE: Administration of Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale and Oxford Happiness Questionnaire and
Calculations of Reliability and Validity Coefficients
INTRODUCTION:
1. What does Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale measure?

2. Research about unidimensionality versus multidimensionality of Self-esteem
3. Researches about Self-esteem, its correlates, research about Indian population.
4. What does Oxford Happiness Questionnaire measure?
5. Research about construct of happiness/ subjective well-being
6. Test reliability- Cronbach’s Alpha reliability estimates
7. Test Validity- Criterion-related Validity, Concurrent Validity
PROBLEM:
1. To administer Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale and calculate Cronbach’s Alpha Reliability

Coefficient
2. To administer Oxford Happiness Questionnaire and calculate concurrent validity of
Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale by correlating scores on Self-esteem Scale with those on
Happiness Questionnaire
METHOD:
• Sample:
Individual Data:
Name of Test-taker Age Gender Class Emotional State

Female
Group data: Female Degree College Students (N= 30)
• Materials:
1) Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale and its manual (Refer to Appendix A for Rosenberg Self-esteem
Scale)
2) Oxford Happiness Questionnaire and its manual (Refer to Appendix B for Oxford Happiness
Questionnaire)
3) Stationery
4) Screen
39
PROCEDURE:
All the required material is arranged and test-taker was called in the laboratory. She is asked to
sit comfortably facing the screen and rapport was established. Both Rosenberg Self- esteem Scale
and Oxford Happiness Questionnaire measure personality traits. To know accurately about oneself
it is important on the part of test taker to give honest answers. So while building rapport, importance
of responding honestly is emphasized. This is done by stating the following:
The test administrator says, “We all differ in the way we think, feel and act. All of us like to know
more about ourselves. Today, in this practical, you will come to know something about yourself. For
this purpose, I will administer two tests on you. Although I used the word ‘test’, please understand
that there are no ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ answers here because, as I mentioned earlier, people differ in
terms of how they think and feel and no way of thinking and feeling is ‘right’ or ‘wrong’. So, please
respond to these tests honestly in terms of what IS TRUE in YOUR case and not in terms of WHAT
SHOULD BE TRUE. How accurately you come to know about yourself depends on how honestly you
respond to these tests. So, it is important to respond truthfully. Please be assured that your
responses will be kept confidential and only total scores will be used for the purpose of further
calculations”.
Then test administrator gives a copy of Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale and asks the test-taker to
fill in the demographic details on the Scale by saying, “Please take this Scale. Please enter the details
of your name, age, class and gender on it”. Test-administrator gives the test-taker a pencil and
ensures that she fills in the required details before giving further instructions. The test-administrator
then says, “This is a Scale which assesses how you feel about yourself. I will be reading the
instructions given on this paper. Listen carefully and you too read them in your mind with me”. Test-
administrator then reads the instructions given on the Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale. He/she then
asks, “Have you understood? Do you have any doubts? Please note that there is no time limit for
the test but I request you not to think too much about any one statement. Also do not omit any
item. Please begin”. Test-taker is, then, given time to finish responding to Self-esteem Scale. When
she finishes responding the test-administrator makes sure that she has responded to all the items,
then the Scale is taken back and instructions for the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire are given.
The test-administrator gives a copy of Oxford Happiness Questionnaire to the test-taker and
says, “This is another test which assesses how you feel about yourself, others and life, in general.
Please fill in the details like your name, age, class and gender on this questionnaire too before we
begin. Test-administrator ensures that the test-taker fills in the required details before giving further
instructions. The test-administrator, then, says, “I will read the instructions mentioned on this
paper. Listen carefully and read them in your mind as I read”. The test-administrator reads the
instructions on the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire and then asks the test-taker, “Have you
understood? Do you have any questions? Like in the earlier test, please respond honestly and do
not omit any item. Please begin”. The test-taker is then given time to respond to the Questionnaire.
When she finishes, the test-administrator ensures that she has responded to all the items and the
Questionnaire is taken back. The test-taker is then asked the following PTQs:
POST-TASK QUESTIONS:
1) How was your overall experience of taking these tests?
2) What were your thoughts when you responded to the first test?
3) What were your thoughts when you responded to the second test?
40
4) Was there any particular event/incident that had happened today or in the recent past which
influenced your responses to these test items today? If yes, what was the prominent feeling you
experienced as a result of that incident?
Since the test-administrator has to score both the tests, find Z scores on both of them to correctly
interpret test-taker’s scores, he/s he cannot debrief the test-taker immediately. So, he/she says,
“Like you, these tests will be administered on some more female Degree College students. I will
have to pull scores of other test-takers to interpret your score meaningfully. So, when all the scores
are available and I am ready with interpretation, I will call you to tell you what exactly the tests
measured and what your scores indicate. Do you want to ask or share anything more with regard to
these tests or test-taking experience?” Test-taker’s comments, opinions are patiently heard,
questions, if any, are answered. She is thanked for participation and is escorted to the door.
The test-administrator then finds out test-taker’s total scores on both the tests by following
instructions for scoring. He/ she then fills in the data in relevant tables. When data of 30 test-takers
is available, test-administrator finds out Z scores of one’s own test-taker on both the tests. He/she
also finds out reliability (Cronbach’s Alpha) and validity (concurrent validity) of Rosenberg Self-
esteem Scale and the report about the same is written. When the scores and their interpretation on
Self-esteem Scale and Happiness Questionnaires is ready, test-taker is called in the laboratory and
is given interpretation of her scores as follows:
DEBRIEFING:
Test-administrator says, “Do you remember, on __________(date) I administered two tests on
you and I had mentioned that by taking them you will come to know something more about
yourself? Today I am going to tell you what those tests measured, what your score was and what
those scores mean”.
“Both the tests measured important aspects of your personality. Personality is an individual’s
typical way of thinking, feeling and acting. The first test that I gave you was Rosenberg Self-esteem
Scale. (The test-administrator shows the test-taker her answered scale). Self-esteem is defined as
individual’s global positive or negative attitude about oneself. In simple words, it is how worthy an
individual considers oneself. People with high self-esteem have higher feelings of self-respect and
self-confidence. They experience higher emotional well-being and are highly motivated. Self-esteem
plays important role in one’s mental health. Higher self-esteem helps people cope with life’s
challenges. On the contrary, people with low self-esteem are more prone to feeling low, sad and
anxious, less confident.
“Your score on Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale was ________. This test was administered to some
more Female Degree College students. When data from 30 individuals were collected and analysed,
we found that average score on this Self-esteem Scale was ___________. Thus, your score was
higher than /lower than/close to average score. We calculated a standard score called Z score to
meaningfully compare your score with that of a group. It was found that Z score for your score on
Self-esteem Scale was __________. This Z score implies that
____________________________________________ (interpret the Z score with reference to Z
score table and communicate the interpretation)”. Developing and maintaining close, supportive
interpersonal relationships, setting goals and making attempt to achieve them, developing
competencies, developing rational beliefs about self, others, life are some of the ways to raise self-
esteem.
41
“The second test that I administered was Oxford Happiness Questionnaire. (Test-administrator
showed the test-taker her answered questionnaire). As its name suggests it is a measure of personal
happiness. Happiness is an emotional state that reflects a high level of mental and emotional well-
being. There are different theories explaining what happiness means. According to some of those
theories, happy individuals are autonomous, they have environmental mastery, they are engaged
in personal growth, self-exploration. One of the theories of happiness states that those who are
happy have rewarding relationships; they contribute to other’s happiness. People who score low on
the tests of happiness tend to experience negative emotions more often. Your score on this
questionnaire was ____________. The average score of the group was ____________. Thus, as
compared to the group, your score was higher than /lower than/close to average score. To
meaningfully interpret your score, we calculated Z score of this obtained score. It was found that Z
score for your score on Happiness Questionnaire was __________. This Z score implies that
____________________________________________ (interpret the Z score with reference to Z
score table and communicate the interpretation)”.
“Do you agree with this interpretation? Does it match with how you think and feel about
yourself? Do you want to share any opinions about the interpretation or ask anything based on
interpretation?”
(Note: It is advised that test-interpretation and debriefing should be done in the presence of
supervising teacher. Especially if test-taker’s score on any of the tests is below average then care
should be taken by both the teacher as well as the student that test- results are communicated
with due sensitivity and the test-taker leaves the lab feeling as positive as she was feeling when
she entered the lab. It is important to communicate test-results sensitively keeping in mind that
some test-takers may get emotional after listening to their test-interpretation, especially in case
of personality tests. Teachers should sensitize students about importance of communicating test-
results accurately and sensitively).
ANALYSIS OF DATA:
1) Total scores of 30 test-takers on Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale and Oxford happiness
Questionnaire were entered in Table 1. Mean, variance and SD of both sets of scores were
computed and entered in Table 1.
2) Test-takers Z scores were computed for obtained scores on both the tests- Self-esteem Scale
and Happiness Questionnaire and entered in Table 2.
3) 30 test-takers scores on each of the items of Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale were entered in
Table 3 and mean and variances for scores on each item were computed and entered in the
same table.
4) Internal Consistency Reliability estimate (Cronbach’s Alpha) was calculated.
5) To find out concurrent validity of Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale, Pearson r correlation between
scores of Self-esteem Scale and Oxford Happiness Questionnaire of 30 test-takers was
calculated. Level of significance of the obtained value of r was found out by referring to
appropriate statistical tables.
42
Table 1: Total Scores on Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale and Oxford Happiness Questionnaire of 30
test-takers
Test-taker Total Score on Total Score on

no Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale Oxford Happiness Questionnaire
1
2
29
30
Total
Mean
Variance
(σᵼ²)
SD
Table 2: Calculations of Z scores on Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale and Oxford Happiness

Questionnaire
Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale Oxford Happiness Questionnaire

Test-taker’s total score on the
test
Mean score on the test
SD of the total scores on the
test
Z score calculation Z= Score-Mean/SD Z= Score-Mean/SD
Obtained Z Score on the test
Calculation of Internal Consistency Reliability Estimate (Cronbach’s Alpha) of Rosenberg Self-

Esteem Scale
Table 3: Scores of 30 test-takers on each item of Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale and their variances
Test- Scores on Item Numbers…

taker no 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1
2
3
29
30
Total
Mean
43
Variance
on each
item (Σσ₁²) (Σσ₂²) (Σσ₃²) (Σσ₄²) (Σσ₅²) (Σσ₆²) (Σσ₇²) (Σσ₈²) (Σσ₉²) (Σσ₁₀²)
Total of variances on each item (Σσᵢ²)
= Σσ₁² + Σσ₂² + Σσ₃² + Σσ₄² + Σσ₅² + Σσ₆² + Σσ₇² + Σσ₈²+ Σσ₉² + Σσ₁₀²
Therefore, Σσᵢ² =
Cronbach’s Alpha (α) =
k Σσᵢ²
1-
k-1 σᵼ²
where,
k= number of items in Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale (10)
Σσᵢ² = Total of variances of scores on each item of Self-esteem Scale
Σσᵼ²= Variance of total scores on Self-esteem Scale on 30 Test-takers
Therefore, Cronbach’s Alpha =
k Σσᵢ²
1-
k-1 σᵼ²
Therefore, Internal Consistency Reliability of Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale is ___________
___________________________________________________________________________
44
CALCULATION OF CONCURRENT VALIDITY OF

ROSENBERG SELF-ESTEEM SCALE
Concurrent Validity is a type of Criterion-related validity. While calculating criterion-related validity

of a test, scores on to-be-validated test are correlated with scores on a criterion. The criterion must
have three characteristics:
1) It must be valid
2) It must be relevant
3) It must be uncontaminated
When concurrent validity of a test is calculated, test scores and criterion scores are available at the
same time. In this practical, criterion is the scores on Oxford Happiness Questionnaire. Oxford
Happiness Questionnaire is a reliable and valid measure of Happiness (Hills & Argyle, 2002).
Research shows that there is positive relationship between Happiness and Self-esteem (Hills &
Argyle, 2002, Baumeister et al., 2003). Thus, it’s a relevant criterion. While responding to Oxford
Happiness Questionnaire, test-taker is unaware of his/her scores on Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale
and its interpretation. So, criterion score (Score on Oxford Happiness Questionnaire) is
uncontaminated by test-taker’s knowledge of test score (score on Self-esteem Scale). Thus, scores
on Oxford Happiness Questionnaire is a good criterion for finding out concurrent validity of
Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale. Concurrent Validity is calculated by correlating the test scores and the
criterion scores. Here, Pearson r correlation coefficient would be found out between these two data
sets as follows:
Table 4: Correlation between scores on Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale and Oxford Happiness
Questionnaire
Test- Total Score on Total Score on

taker Rosenberg Self-esteem Oxford Happiness
X² Y² XY
no Scale Questionnaire
(X) (Y)
1
2
3
28
29
30
Total ΣX= ΣY= Σ X²= ΣY²= ΣXY=
Pearson r Calculation:
N (ΣXY) - (ΣX) (ΣY)

r = ____ ____________________________________
[N. ΣX²- (ΣX)²] [ N. ΣY² - (ΣY)² ]
=
Therefore, r (28) = p< OR , r (28) = , ns
45

• Individual Data Discussion:
Scores of test - taker on both the tests should be discussed on the following lines-
a) What was the score of the test-taker on Self-esteem Scale? What were the average score and
SD? As compared to mean, how was the test-taker’s score-higher/lower/ close to mean?
b) What was the Z score on Self-esteem Scale? After referring to table of Z scores, what was
found? Interpret the obtained Z score by referring to Z scores table.
c) What is implied by the score obtained by test-taker on Self-esteem Scale? Did the test-taker
agree with the interpretation given?
d) What was the score of the test-taker on Oxford Happiness Questionnaire? What were the
average score and SD? As compared to mean, how was the test-taker’s score-higher/lower/
close to mean?
e) What was the Z score on the Happiness Questionnaire? After referring to table of Z scores,
what was found? Interpret the obtained Z score by referring to Z scores table.
f) What is implied by the score obtained by test-taker on Happiness Questionnaire? Did the test-
taker agree with the interpretation given?
• Group Data Discussion:

a) With reference to Table 1, discuss means, variances and SDs of scores of 30 test-taker on
Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale and Oxford Happiness Questionnaire.
b) In order to find out internal consistency reliability of Self-esteem Scale, Cronbach’s Alpha index
was calculated (since items on Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale were non-dichotomous items,
they involved use of Likert Scale). What was the obtained value of Cronbach’s Alpha? Interpret
whether this value indicates high/moderate/low reliability?
c) Were there any sources of error variance that operated when this test was administered to
the current test-taker, which might have affected the obtained score on the test, and that
should be considered while interpreting the obtained reliability coefficient?
d) With reference to research about dimensionality of the construct of self-esteem, interpret
obtained value of internal consistency reliability coefficient.
e) With reference to Table 4 and the following calculation of Pearson r correlation between scores
on Self-esteem Scale and Oxford Happiness Questionnaire, discuss what was the obtained r
value? Was this value found to be statistically significant? What is the implication of this value
being significant/non-significant? Can it be said that Rosenberg’s Self-esteem Scale has
concurrent validity?
f) With reference to relevant research papers, discuss if it was appropriate to use scores on
Oxford Happiness Questionnaire as ‘criterion scores’. Which other criteria can be used to find
out concurrent validity of Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale? Justify your answer.
CONCLUSION:
Internal consistency reliability estimate (Cronbach’s Alpha index) was fund to be_________.
Mention if it indicates high/moderate/low reliability.
Pearson r correlation coefficient between scores on Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale and Oxford
Happiness Questionnaire was found to be_________. It was found to be statistically
significant/non-significant. Mention what this indicates about validity of Rosenberg’s Self-esteem
Scale.
46
References:
Abdel-Khalek, A. M., (2016). Introduction to the Psychology of Self-esteem. In Holloway, F. (Ed.),

Self-esteem: Perspectives, Influences and Improvement Strategies, 1-23, Nova Science Publishers.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/311440256_Introduction_to_the_Psychology_of_self-
esteem/link/587e475308ae9a860ff53995/download
Baumeister, R.F., Campbell, J.D., Krueger, J.I. & Vohs, K.D.(2003). Does High Self-esteem Cause
Better Performance, Interpersonal Success, Happiness or Healthier Lifestyles? Psychological
Science in the Public Interest, 4(1), 1-44
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/1529-1006.01431
Dhillon, M., Dhawan, P., Ahuja, K., Kalyani, A., & Papneja, D. (2016). Factors Influencing Self-
esteem of Indian Female Adolescents. Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences (IOSR-JHSS),
21(7), 56-63
DOI: 10.9790/0837-2107085663
D’Mello, L., Monteiro, M., & Pinto, N. (2018). A Study on Self-esteem and Academic Performance
among the Students. International Journal of Health Sciences and Pharmacy (IJHSP), 2(1), 1-7.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1156448.
Dogan, T., Totan, T. & Sapmaz, F. (2013). The Role of Self-esteem, Psychological Well-being,
Emotional Self-efficacy And Affect Balance on Happiness: A Path Model. European Scientific
Journal, 9(20), 31-42
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/THE-ROLE-OF-SELF-ESTEEM%2C-PSYCHOLOGICAL-WELL-
BEING%2C-Do%C4%9Fan-Totan/590e1b92c300cf81d165900c7373068ba2eb3d6b
Dubner, D. (2013). The Psychology and Science of Happiness: What does the research say?
Counseling and Wellness: A Professional Counseling Journal, 4, 92-106
http://openknowledge.nau.edu/2647/7/Dubner_D_2013_Psychology_science_happiness%281%2
9.pdf
Emler, N. (2001). Self-esteem: The Costs and Causes of Low Self-worth. New York Publishing
Services.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/30530126_Self_esteem_The_costs_and_causes_of_lo
w_self_worth/link/0912f50ab6fb05d295000000/download
Erozkan, A., Dogan, U., & Adiguzel, A. (2016). Self-efficacy, Self-esteem and Subjective Happiness
of Teacher Candidate at the Pedagogical Formation Certificate Program. Journal of Education And
Training Studies, 4(8), 72-82.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v4i8.1535
García J.A., Olmos, F.C. Matheu, M. L.,& Carreno, T.P. (2019). Self-esteem Levels vs Global Scores
On The Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale, Heliyon, 5(3): e01378.
doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e01378
47
Hills, P. & Argyle, M. (2002). The Oxford Happiness Questionnaire: A Compact Scale for the
Measurement of Psychological Well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 33, 1073-1082
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/cadd/7a4eea79e031ec0cf8b8054f668057f33dda.pdf?_ga=2.149
561328.757751930.1588948711-1968066939.1565576832
Kaczmarek, L.D.(2017). Happiness. In Zeigler-Hills, V. & Shackfield, T.K. (Eds.). Encyclopaedia of

Personality and Individual Differences (pp.1-5), Springer International Publishing.
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-28099-8_522-1
Kashdan, T.B. (2004). The Assessment of Subjective Well-being (issues raised by the Oxford
Happiness Questionnaire). Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 1225-1232.
http://mason.gmu.edu/~tkashdan/publications/happy.PDF
Lyubomirsky, S. Tkach, C., & Dimatteo, M.R. (2006). What Are The Differences Between Happiness
and Self-esteem? Social Indicators Research, 78, 363-404.
DOI 10.1007/s11205-005-0213-y
Mannarini, S. (2010). Assessing the Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale Dimensionality and Items
Functioning in Relation To Self-efficacy And Attachment Styles. Testing, Psychometrics and
Methodology in Applied Psychology, 17 (4), 229-242
https://www.tpmap.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/17.4.4.pdf
Tafarodi, R.W. & Swann, W.B.,Jr. (2001). Two-dimensional Self-esteem: Theory and Measurement.
Personality and Individual Differences, 31, 653-673.
https://labs.la.utexas.edu/swann/files/2016/03/tafar_swann2001.pdf
48
Appendix A
Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale
(While giving the Scale to the test-taker the name of the Scale should be mentioned as ‘RSS’ to
avoid biased responses)
RSS
Name of the test-taker: _____________________________________________________
Age:___________________Class:____________ Gender:______________
Below is a list of statements dealing with your general feelings about yourself. Please read each
statement carefully and indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with each statement
using the rating scale ranging from 1 to 4, where
1 = Strongly Disagree 2 = Disagree

3 = Agree 4 = Strongly Agree
Please encircle ( ) the number in front of each statement which indicates your extent of agreement
or disagreement with it. Please respond honestly based on WHAT IS TRUE in YOUR case. Please do
not omit any item.
No Statement Ratings
1 On the whole, I am satisfied with myself. 1 2 3 4
2 At times, I think I am no good at all. 1 2 3 4
3 I feel that I have a number of good qualities 1 2 3 4
4 I am able to do things as well as most other people 1 2 3 4
5 I feel I do not have much to be proud of 1 2 3 4
6 I certainly feel useless at times 1 2 3 4
7 I feel that I'm a person of worth, at least equal to 1 2 3 4
others
8 I wish I could have more respect for myself 1 2 3 4
9 All in all, I am inclined to feel that I'm a failure 1 2 3 4
10 I take a positive attitude toward myself 1 2 3 4
Scoring:
Items 2, 5, 6, 8 and 9 are reverse coded. (i.e. if the test-taker has chosen the rating of 1, it is to be
scored as 4 and vice-versa and if the test-taker has chosen the rating of 2, it is to be scored as 3
and vice-versa). For the rest of the items, consider the rating chosen by the test-taker as her score
on that item. Total score is found out by adding the scores on each item. Higher scores indicate
higher level of Self-esteem.
49
Appendix B
Oxford Happiness Questionnaire
(While giving the Scale to the test-taker the name of the Scale should be mentioned as ‘OHQ’
to avoid biased responses)
OHQ
Name of the test-taker: _____________________________________________________
Age:___________________Class:____________ Gender:______________
Below are a number of statements about happiness. Please indicate how much you agree or
disagree with each by encircling a number mentioned in front of each statement. Use the
following scale to mark your response
1 = strongly disagree 2 = moderately disagree 3 = slightly disagree
4 = slightly agree 5 = moderately agree 6 = strongly agree
Please read the statements carefully, some of the questions are phrased positively and others
negatively. Don’t take too long over individual questions; there are no “right” or “wrong” answers
(and no trick questions). The first answer that comes into your head is probably the right one for
you. If you find some of the questions difficult, please give the answer that is true for you in
general or for most of the time.
Sr Statement Ratings
no
1 I don’t feel particularly pleased with the way I am. 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 I am intensely interested in other people. 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 I feel that life is very rewarding. 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 I have very warm feelings towards almost everyone. 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 I rarely wake up feeling rested. 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 I am not particularly optimistic about the future. 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 I find most things amusing. 1 2 3 4 5 6
8 I am always committed and involved. 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 Life is good. 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 I do not think that the world is a good place. 1 2 3 4 5 6
11 I laugh a lot. 1 2 3 4 5 6
12 I am well satisfied about everything in my life. 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 I don’t think I look attractive. 1 2 3 4 5 6
14 There is a gap between what I would like to do and what I 1 2 3 4 5 6
have done.
15 I am very happy. 1 2 3 4 5 6
16 I find beauty in some things. 1 2 3 4 5 6
17 I always have a cheerful effect on others. 1 2 3 4 5 6
18 I can fit in (find time for) everything I want to. 1 2 3 4 5 6
50
19 I feel that I am not especially in control of my life. 1 2 3 4 5 6

20 I feel able to take anything on. 1 2 3 4 5 6
21 I feel fully mentally alert. 1 2 3 4 5 6
22 I often experience joy and elation. 1 2 3 4 5 6
23 I don’t find it easy to make decisions. 1 2 3 4 5 6
24 I don’t have a particular sense of meaning and purpose in my 1 2 3 4 5 6
life.
25 I feel I have a great deal of energy. 1 2 3 4 5 6
26 I usually have a good influence on events. 1 2 3 4 5 6
27 I don’t have fun with other people. 1 2 3 4 5 6
28 I don’t feel particularly healthy. 1 2 3 4 5 6
29 I don’t have particularly happy memories of the past. 1 2 3 4 5 6
Scoring:
Items 1,5,6,10,13,14,19,23,24,27,28,29 should be reverse coded (i.e. if the test-taker has chosen
the rating of 1, then it should be scored as 6 and vice-versa; if she has chosen the rating of 2, then
it should be scored as 5 and vice-versa; and if she has chosen the rating of 3 it should be scored as
4 and vice-versa). Total score is obtained by adding the scores on individual items. Higher scores
indicate higher level of happiness.
------------------------------------------
PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTING
Administration of Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale and Oxford Happiness
Questionnaire and Calculations of Reliability and Validity Coefficients
INTRODUCTION
Self-esteem is related to personal beliefs about skills, abilities, and social relationships. Self-esteem is
also defined as a global barometer of self-evaluation involving cognitive appraisals about general self-
worth and affective experiences of the self that are linked to these global appraisals (Murphy, Stosny
and Morrel, 2005).
High self-esteem refers to a highly favourable global evaluation of the self. It may refer to an accurate,
justified, balanced appreciation of one’s worth as a person and one’s successes and competencies. It
can also be an inflated, arrogant, grandiose, unwarranted sense of conceited superiority over others
Low self-esteem, refers to an unfavourable definition of the self. Low self-esteem is an accurate, well-
founded understanding of one’s shortcomings as a person. It can also be a distorted, even pathological
sense of insecurity and inferiority.
People with high self-esteem have higher feelings of self-respect and self-confidence. They experience
higher emotional well-being and are highly motivated. Self-esteem plays important role in one’s
mental health. Higher self-esteem helps people cope with life’s challenges. On the contrary, people
with low self-esteem are more prone to feeling low, sad and anxious, less confident
Developing and maintaining close, supportive interpersonal relationships, setting goals and making
attempt to achieve them, developing rational beliefs about self, others, life are some of the ways to
raise self-esteem.
What does the Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale measure?

Morris Rosenberg (1965) one of the pioneers in the domain of self esteem, devised a method for
measuring self-esteem based on the notion that it is an attitude. Attitudes are defined primarily in
terms of emotional or evaluative reactions; they constitute our reactions of approval or disapproval,
liking or dislike, for social practices, habits, categories of people, political policies, public figures and
so on.
Rosenberg regarded self-esteem as an evaluative attitude towards the self. Rosenberg believed that this
attitude is powerfully shaped by what others are believed to think of the self.
Rosenberg’s (1965) scale was one of the first and is still one of the most widely used measures of self-
esteem- emphasises feelings. One attraction of his scale is its simplicity. The basic scale consists of
just ten statements of opinion about oneself and one is simply asked whether one agrees with the
sentiment expressed or not. The items are answered on a 4-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly agree)
to 4 (strongly disagree). Agreement with any of these statements is not agreeing that one is better than
or superior to others. The sentiments are very general evaluations of oneself. It has appropriately been
described as a measure of global self-esteem. This scale measures global self-worth by measuring
both positive and negative feelings about the self.
Page | 1
It is unidimensional scale, contains only 10 likert type items which contributes to ease of
administration, scoring, and interpretation. Statements are related to overall feelings of self-worth or
self-acceptance.
The measure’s relatively high internal consistency and test-retest reliability contribute to its popularity.
Test–retest correlations are typically in the range of .82–.88, (Blascovich and Tomaka, 1993;
Rosenberg, 1986).
Although originally developed for use with adolescents, this scale is also used widely with adults.
Schmitt and Allik (2005) stated that the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale has been translated into 28
languages. They administered this scale to 16, 998 participants across 53 nations, and found that its
scores correlated with neuroticism, extraversion, and romantic attachment styles within nearly all
nations, providing additional support for cross-cultural equivalence of the scale.
However, there are many critics of the Rosenberg scale. Some consider it too short, too obvious,
unrealistically unitary, and fails to predict behavior effectively (Baumeister, 1994). The main problem
in self-esteem questionnairses, including the Rosenberg scale, is the social desirability, i.e., the
defensive self-esteem, denying personal problems and inadequacies, and making a false good
impression.
Research about Uni-dimensionality versus Multi-dimensionality of Self-esteem

Self-esteem can refer to the overall self or to specific aspects of the self, such as how people feel about
their social standing, racial or ethnic group, physical features, athletic skills, job or school performance.
Some authors conceptualized it as a unitary global trait, whereas others view it as a multidimensional
trait with independent subcomponents (performance, social, and physical self-esteem) (Heatherton and
Wyland, 2003).
Reasoner (2005) viewed self-esteem as composed of two distinct dimensions: competence and worth.
He defines self-esteem as “the experience of being capable of meeting life challenges and being worthy
of happiness”
Branden (1969) maintained that self-esteem consists of two components:
(a) to consider oneself effective, to trust in one’s ability to think, learn, choose and make correct
decisions, and to overcome challenges and produce changes,
(b) to respect oneself, the confidence in one’s right to be happy, and the confidence that people are
worthy of the respect, love and self-fulfilment appearing in their lives.
Deci and Ryan (1995) distinguished between contingent and true self-esteem. Contingent self-esteem
refers to feelings about oneself that result from, and dependent on, matching some standards of
excellence or living up to some interpersonal or intrapsychic expectations. It is associated with being
ego-involved in some types of outcomes and dutifully achieving them. It often involves social
comparison
True self-esteem is more stable and based in a solid and secure sense of self. True self-esteem is a
sense of self as worthy, not by virtue of external trappings or specific accomplishments, but because
one experiences one’s worth as inherent or “given.”
Page | 2
Some authors distinguished between trait self-esteem, i.e., stable in time as it is a part of the personality
and the state self-esteem, which is more easily changed, being affected by events, situations, and
emotions (Gilovich, Keltner and Nisbett, 2006).
Research about Self-esteem & its correlates

Studies have identified self-esteem as an important determinant of emotional well-being (Baumeister,
Campbell, Krueger and Vohs, 2003). Several studies have found that high self-esteem individuals are
more persistent in the face of failure than low self-esteem individuals. High self esteem individuals
also appear more effective in self-regulating goal-directed behavior (Di Paula and Campbell, 2002).
People with high self-esteem have higher feelings of self-respect and self-confidence. Self-esteem
plays important role in one’s mental health. Higher self-esteem helps people cope with life’s
challenges. People with low self-esteem are more prone to feeling low, sad and anxious, less confident.
There is a strong connection between self-esteem and happiness - high level of self-esteem leads to
happy and productive lives- it is a direct predictor of happiness (Baumeister, Campbell, Krueger, &
Vohs, 2003). Past studies suggest that there is a direct link between the level of self-esteem and
happiness (Santos et al. 2012; Santos et al. 2014). On the other hand, depending on the circumstances,
low level of self-esteem is known to have a tendency to result in depression.
Research about Indian population

A study was undertaken to investigate the Self-esteem and academic achievement of urban and rural
adolescents and examine the gender differences in self-esteem and academic achievement. The sample
of this study consisted of 400 adolescents (200 urban 200 rural) from Varanasi District. Boys and girls
(aged 12 to14) were equally distributed among the urban and rural sample. The findings indicated that
there were no significant differences with regard to self-esteem of rural and urban adolescents. There
were significant differences with regard to academic achievement of rural and urban adolescents.
Urban adolescents scored higher in academic achievement than rural adolescents. Boys scored
significantly higher on self-esteem as compared to girls. Significant gender differences were found in
academic achievement. Girls were significantly higher on academic achievement as compared to boys .
(Joshi & Srivastava, 2009)
A study by Manhas, 2013 evaluated the self-esteem and quality of life of people living with HIV/AIDS
in the Indian population using a correlational design. Results indicated a significant positive correlation
between self esteem and the different dimensions of quality of life. Interventions designed for people
with HIV/AIDS could well include self esteem as a moderator of quality of life.
A study was conducted among the young adults of age group 20-25 years residing in Raipur, Uttar
Pradesh, India to understand the association between gender and self esteem among the young adults
A total of 203 respondents were selected out of which 110 were male respondents and 93 were female
respondents. A semi-structured questionnaire was prepared to assess self-esteem and applied along
with the Rosenberg self esteem scale. Results indicated that Self esteem of the men was significantly
higher than that of women. Education of respondents, education of respondent’s mother, family
income, caste and number of siblings were associated with self esteem. Researchers concluded that
attitudes of family members towards girl child should be changed to enhance gender neutrality
atmosphere at home and in the society as whole. Policy efforts must address sex specific needs to
elaborate further on the areas of gender inequalities. (Nupur & Mahapatro, 2016)
Page | 3
Happiness
Happiness is one of the key interests of positive psychology and since the twenty-first century there
has been much debate and research carried out in order to understand happiness. However, theories of
happiness have been around for much longer than positive psychology and scientists and philosophers
have been analysing happiness since the third century B.C. Several theories have been developed in
an attempt to define and describe happiness in order for psychologists and other scientists to study it.
The two most dominant and prevalent of these theories are Hedonism & Eudaimonism: both are rooted
in Greek philosophy. Hedonic view of happiness is based on individual needs over needs of the
community and is the pursuit of pleasure, comfort and enjoyment. It comes from a theory coined by
Greek philosopher Epicurus who claimed that people desire pleasure and avoid pain and discomfort.
Eudaimonism equates happiness to "human flourishing” through pursuing goals which are meaningful
not only to the individual but to the society they live in through good functioning in terms of growth
opportunities, effort, and commitment to achieving goals.
In 1989 psychologist C. D. Ryff highlighted the distinction between these two theories by suggesting
that Eudaimonic well-being equated to psychological well being whilst Hedonic well-being equated
to pleasure
Happiness in psychology has two references. First, happiness is an umbrella term for several theories
of well-being. These theories cover intrinsically rewarding and valued experience, positive beliefs
about self and the world, or positive psychological functioning. Second, happiness has been considered
a basic emotion by most theorists within the psychology of emotions
Lyubomirsky and Lepper (1999) remark that, despite a century of research, objective markers such as
economic forces (Juster and Stafford, 1985), life events (Headey and Wearing, 1989), and dispositional
factors (Costa and McCrae, 1980, 1984) are correlated with happiness less strongly (Diener, 1984;
Lyubomirsky and Ross, 1997). Many researchers thus prefer to conceptualise happiness as 'subjective
well-being’ (SWB) (e.g. Alexandrova, 2008) which is how a person feels their life is going from their
point of view.
Diener (2000) suggests that well-being is associated with the individuals’ evaluations of their own
lives. Happiness is not just a fleeting mood but an ingrained sense of one's personal well-being; a
comprehensive measure of one's satisfaction with life and a general and persistent feeling of emotional
well-being (Fordyce, 1977)
Positive psychology researcher Sonja Lyubomirsky elaborates, describing happiness as “the
experience of joy, contentment, or positive well-being, combined with a sense that one’s life is good,
meaningful, and worthwhile.”
We can all identify people who are happy, even in the face of adversity, or people who are consistently
unhappy, despite the best of circumstances (Myers and Diener, 1995)
Alexandrova (2008) suggests that this is because SWB has two components:
Affective -our happiness is affected by our recent experiences: positive or negative
Cognitive -our happiness is determined by our judgments of the events that happen to us, which
reflects our disposition: whether we are an inherently happy or unhappy person
Page | 4
Happy individuals are autonomous, they have environmental mastery, they are engaged in personal
growth, self-exploration. One of the theories of happiness states that those who are happy have
rewarding relationships; they contribute to other’s happiness. People who score low on the tests of
happiness tend to experience negative emotions more often.
What does Oxford Happiness Questionnaire measure?

The Oxford Happiness Inventory (OHI, Argyle, Martin, & Crossland, 1989) was devised as a broad
measure of personal happiness has been proven consistent across cultures (Hills & Argyle, 2002) The
scale was designed using the Beck Depression Inventory as a template (questions measured on a scale
of 0-3), Early conceptions of happiness were that it is simply the opposite of sadness.
The first criticism -perhaps happiness should be conceptualised as something more than the opposite
of sadness and that to do so is not recognising the unique dimensions of happiness. The second
criticism, offered by Hills & Argyle (2002) is that there is a tendency for answers to converge in the
middle of the scale, allowing little distinction between 'levels' of happiness.
Hills and Argyle (2002) developed the 29-item Oxford Happiness Questionnaire (OHQ) to be ‘‘an
improved instrument’’ to assess subjective well-being (SWB). They changed the response format
from a 0–3 multiple choice scoring format to a more widely used Likert Scale (1=‘‘strongly disagree’’
to 6=‘‘strongly agree’’). Whilst this expands the scope for distinction somewhat, the statements still
seem to reflect the notion that happiness is merely the opposite of sadness.
Research about construct of happiness/ subjective well-being

Chida and Steptoe (2008) conducted a meta-analysis of the studies examining the association between
positive well-being and mortality in both healthy and diseased populations. Positive psychological
well-being was related to lower mortality in both healthy and diseased populations.
Positive moods such as joy, happiness, and energy, as well as characteristics such as life satisfaction,
hopefulness, optimism, and sense of humor were associated with reduced risk of mortality in healthy
populations, and predicted longevity.
Lyubomirsky and Lepper (2002), obtained data from more than 600 adults ranging in age from 51 to
95. Happiness and self-esteem were highly correlated (r= 0.58). Self esteem and happiness had very
different patterns of correlation with other predictor variables, which supports the conclusion that
happiness and self-esteem are in fact distinct constructs that can be measured separately despite their
relatively high intercorrelation. In Lyubomirsky and Lepper’s study, self-esteem was more strongly
correlated than happiness with hopelessness, optimism, and sense of mastery. Happiness was more
strongly correlated than self-esteem with energy level, overall health, loneliness, mood and emotion,
and purpose in life.
Cross cultural findings indicate that the strength of the relation between self esteem and subjective
wellbeing varies considerably across cultures. Although Diener and Diener (1995) found that life
satisfaction correlated positively with self esteem across all of the 31 nations they examined, the size
of this correlation differed substantially across nations. Self esteem and life satisfaction correlated 0.6
in samples from the United States and Canada whereas they correlated only 0.08 among Indian and
0.27 among Bahrain women. Across the entire pool of nations the individualism of the nations
correlated 0.53 with the size of self esteem and life satisfaction relation. Thus self esteem predicts life
satisfaction more strongly in individualist than in collectivist societies
Page | 5
Diener and Diener (1995) proposed that in individualistic countries, people are socialized to attend to
their own internal attributes, and so these become important in determining overall happiness, whereas
collectivistic cultures encourage people to focus on groups and relationships.
Test reliability- Cronbach’s Alpha reliability estimates

Inter-item consistency
Reliability refers to consistency in measurement.
Inter-item consistency refers to the degree of correlation among all the items on a scale. A measure of
inter-item consistency is calculated from a single administration of a single form of a test. An index
of inter-item consistency is useful in assessing the homogeneity of the test. Tests are said to be
homogeneous if they contain items that measure a single trait. Homogeneity is the degree to which a
test measures a single factor. The extent to which items in a scale are unifactorial. Heterogeneity
describes the degree to which a test measures different factors. A heterogeneous (or nonhomogeneous)
test is composed of items that measure more than one trait.
Test reliability- Coefficient/ Cronbach’s alpha

Coefficient/Cronbach’s alpha is the preferred statistic for obtaining an estimate of internal consistency
reliability. It is appropriate for use on tests containing non-dichotomous items. It can be used to
assess the internal consistency of a test with an item format that is of the Likert type or multiple-
choice type. It requires only one administration of the test.
Unlike a Pearson r, which may range in value from -1 to +1, coefficient alpha typically ranges in
value from 0 to 1. It is calculated to help answer questions about how similar sets of data are.
Here, similarity is gauged on a scale from 0 (absolutely no similarity) to 1 (perfectly identical).
r a is coefficient alpha, k is the number of items, σ is the variance of one item,

Σ is the sum of variances of each item σ2 is the variance of the total test scores
Variance is a measure of the spread, or dispersion, of scores within a sample or population, whereby a
small variance indicates highly similar scores, all close to the mean, and a large variance indicates
more scores at a greater distance from the mean and possibly spread over a larger range
Test Validity
Criterion-related validity describes the extent to which a scale effectively estimates a test taker’s
performance on some outcome measure. The outcome measure, called a criterion, is the main variable
of interest in the analysis. The test scores are truly useful if they can provide a basis for precise
prediction of some criteria.
Criterion validity compares responses to future performance or to those obtained from other, more
well-established tests. Criterion validity is made up two types: predictive and concurrent.
Predictive validity refers to the extent to which test scores forecast future performance.
Page | 6
Concurrent validity is an index of the degree to which a test score is related to some criterion
measure obtained at the same time (concurrently). It is a measure of how well a particular test
correlates with a previously validated measure.
Concurrent validity is calculated when two assessments agree, or a new measure is compared
favourably with one that is already considered valid. Sometimes the concurrent validity of a particular
test (Test A) is explored with respect to another test (Test B). In such studies, prior research has
satisfactorily demonstrated the validity of Test B, so the question becomes: “How well does Test A
compare with Test B?” Here, Test B is used as the validating criterion. A high correlation between
the new test and the criterion means there is concurrent validity.
Concurrent validity is similar to predictive validity, as both of them are commonly interpreted as
correlations between a test and the relevant criteria. Concurrent validity and predictive validity are
only different in the time that the two tests are measured (McIntire & Miller, 2005). In concurrent
validity, the test scores and the criterion scores are taken simultaneously to demonstrate the extent that
test scores correlate. Predictive validity is determined by calculating the correlation coefficient
between the results of the assessment and the subsequent targeted behaviour. The stronger the
correlation between the assessment data and the target behaviour, the higher the degree of predictive
validity the assessment possesses. Conversely, a weak correlation between the assessment data and the
target behaviour indicates low levels of predictive validity.
Concurrent Validity is a type of Criterion-related validity. While calculating criterion-related validity
of a test, scores on to-be-validated test are correlated with scores on a criterion. The criterion must
have three characteristics:
• It must be valid
• It must be relevant
• It must be uncontaminated
When concurrent validity of a test is calculated, test scores and criterion scores are available at the
same time. In this practical, criterion is the scores on Oxford Happiness Questionnaire. Oxford
Happiness Questionnaire is a reliable and valid measure of Happiness (Hills & Argyle, 2002).
Research shows that there is positive relationship between Happiness and Self-esteem (Hills & Argyle,
2002, Baumeister et al., 2003). Thus, it’s a relevant criterion. While responding to Oxford Happiness
Questionnaire, test-taker is unaware of his/her scores on Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale and its
interpretation. So, criterion score (Score on Oxford Happiness Questionnaire) is uncontaminated by
test-taker’s knowledge of test score (score on Self-esteem Scale). Thus, scores on Oxford Happiness
Questionnaire is a good criterion for finding out concurrent validity of Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale.
Z score- Is a converted standard score that is computed to find out whether the raw score of the P was above
or below the mean of the group ie how many standard deviation units the raw score of the P was below or above
the mean of the group. Z score can be either positive or negative. A positive Z score indicates that the test takers
score is above the mean of the group. If Z score is negative, it indicates that the test taker’s score is below the
mean of the group. Z score is calculated by subtracting mean of the group from the raw score of the P divided
by the SD of the group.
Standard Deviation (SD)- a measure of the variability of a set of scores or values within a group,
indicating how narrowly or broadly they deviate from the mean.
Page | 7
Name of Test- Emotional
taker Age Gender Class State
Joovairya Syed 21 Female MA Good
Test-taker no. Total Score on Rosenberg
Total ScoreSelf-esteem
on Oxford Happiness
Scale Questionnaire
1 28 117
2 25 149
3 36 143
4 25 107
5 28 103
6 20 93
7 23 106
8 37 112
9 21 105
10 22 96
11 30 120
12 26 117
13 36 135
14 18 92
15 40 143
16 38 140
17 25 127
18 26 91
19 34 143
20 21 101
21 22 110
22 31 139
23 32 141
24 19 107
25 34 125
26 31 107
27 26 132
28 24 94
29 26 137
30 22 102
31 30 79
32 32 133
33 36 148
34 29 123
35 27 124
36 24 115
37 28 135
38 20 92
Total 1052 4483
Mean 27.684 117.974
Variance (σᵼ²) 34.06 367.27
SD 5.836 19.164
Rosenberg’s Self-esteem
Oxford Happiness
Scale Questionnaire
Test-taker’s score
37on the test 112
Mean score on the test
27.684 117.974
SD of total scores on the test 19.164
5.836
Z score calculation
Z= Score-Mean/SD
Z= Score-Mean/SD
Obtained z score1.6
on the test -0.312
Test- Scores on Item Numbers…
taker 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
No.
1 3 2 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3
2 3 1 3 3 3 1 4 1 3 3
3 3 4 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 3
4 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 2 3 4
5 4 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 4 2
6 4 1 3 2 1 1 4 1 1 2
7 2 1 4 3 1 1 3 1 4 3
8 4 4 4 4 3 3 4 4 4 3
9 1 4 2 3 3 2 2 2 1 1
10 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 1 3 2
11 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
12 3 2 4 3 1 2 3 2 3 3
13 3 4 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 4
14 3 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 2
15 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
16 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 3 4 4
17 2 3 2 2 3 2 3 1 4 3
18 2 2 4 3 2 2 4 1 3 2
19 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 2 4
20 2 3 3 3 2 1 2 1 2 2
21 2 2 3 3 1 1 2 1 3 4
22 4 1 4 3 3 4 3 1 3 4
23 4 2 4 3 3 2 4 2 4 4
24 2 1 3 2 2 1 3 2 2 1
25 3 3 4 4 3 4 3 3 4 3
26 3 4 3 2 4 3 3 2 4 3
27 3 2 4 4 2 1 4 1 2 3
28 3 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 2
29 3 2 4 2 3 2 3 1 3 3
30 2 1 2 3 3 2 3 2 2 2
31 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 2
32 3 3 3 2 4 3 3 3 4 4
33 3 3 3 4 4 4 3 4 4 4
34 4 2 4 3 3 2 4 1 2 4
35 3 2 4 4 3 1 3 2 2 3
36 3 1 3 2 2 2 3 2 3 3
37 3 4 3 3 1 4 3 2 1 4
38 2 2 3 3 2 1 3 1 3 3
Total 110 94 124 109 103 89 122 77 113 113
Mean 2.895 2.474 3.263 2.868 2.711 2.342 3.211 2.026 2.974 2.974
Varian
0.583 1.121 0.469 0.550 0.914 1.204 0.441 1.053 0.891 0.783
ce on
each (12) (22) (32) (42) (52) (62) (72) (82) (92) (102)
item
Total of variances on each item (Σσᵢ²)

= Σσ₁² + Σσ₂² + Σσ₃² + Σσ₄² + Σσ₅² + Σσ₆² + Σσ₇² + Σσ ₈²+ Σσ₉² + Σσ₁₀²
= 0.583 + 1.121 + 0.469 + 0.550 + 0.914 + 1.204 + 0.441 + 1.053 + 0.891 + 0.783
= 8.009
Therefore, Σσᵢ² = 8.009
Cronbach’s Alpha (α) =
Where,
k= number of items in Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale (10) = 10
Σσᵢ² = Total of variances of scores on each item of Self-esteem Scale = 8.009
Σσᵼ²= Variance of total scores on Self-esteem Scale on 38 Test-takers = 34.060
Therefore, Cronbach’s Alpha=
=[10/10-1][1-(8.009/34.060)]
= 0.850
Therefore, Internal Consistency Reliability of Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale is good. The

typical Cronbach Alpha’s range is 0 to 1, where 0 indicates no similarity and 1 indicates
perfectly identical. As the value obtained is 0.850 (closer to 1), we can say that the test is
highly reliable.
Calculation of Concurrent Validity of Rosenberg self-esteem scale

Concurrent Validity is a type of Criterion-related validity. While calculating criterion-related
validity of a test, scores on to-be-validated test are correlated with scores on a criterion. The
criterion must have three characteristics:
1) It must be valid
2) It must be relevant
3) It must be uncontaminated
When concurrent validity of a test is calculated, test scores and criterion scores are available
at the same time. In this practical, criterion is the scores on Oxford Happiness Questionnaire.
Oxford Happiness Questionnaire is a reliable and valid measure of Happiness (Hills &
Argyle, 2002). Research shows that there is positive relationship between Happiness and
Self-esteem (Hills & Argyle, 2002, Baumeister et al., 2003). Thus, it’s a relevant criterion.
While responding to Oxford Happiness Questionnaire, test-taker is unaware of his/her scores
on Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale and its interpretation. So, criterion score (Score on Oxford
Happiness Questionnaire) is uncontaminated by test-taker’s knowledge of test score (score on
Self-esteem Scale). Thus, scores on Oxford Happiness Questionnaire is a good criterion for
finding out concurrent validity of Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale. Concurrent Validity is
calculated by correlating the test scores and the criterion scores. Here, Pearson r correlation
coefficient would be found out between these two data sets as follows:
Table 4: Correlation between scores on Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale and Oxford

Happiness Questionnaire
Test-taker Total Score on Total Score on Oxford

No Rosenberg Self- Happiness X2 Y2 XY
esteem Scale (X) Questionnaire (Y)
1 28 117 784 13689 3276
2 25 149 625 22201 3725
3 36 143 1296 20449 5148
4 25 107 625 11449 2675
5 28 103 784 10609 2884
6 20 93 400 8649 1860
7 23 106 529 11236 2438
8 37 112 1369 12544 4144
9 21 105 441 11025 2205
10 22 96 484 9216 2112
11 30 120 900 14400 3600
12 26 117 676 13689 3042
13 36 135 1296 18225 4860
14 18 92 324 8464 1656
15 40 143 1600 20449 5720
16 38 140 1444 19600 5320
17 25 127 625 16129 3175
18 26 91 676 8281 2366
19 34 143 1156 20449 4862
20 21 101 441 10201 2121
21 22 110 484 12100 2420
22 31 139 961 19321 4309
23 32 141 1024 19881 4512
24 19 107 361 11449 2033
25 34 125 1156 15625 4250
26 31 107 961 11449 3317
27 26 132 676 17424 3432
28 24 94 576 8836 2256
29 26 137 676 18769 3562
30 22 102 484 10404 2244
31 30 79 900 6241 2370
32 32 133 1024 17689 4256
33 36 148 1296 21904 5328
34 29 123 841 15129 3567
35 27 124 729 15376 3348
36 24 115 576 13225 2760
37 28 135 784 18225 3780
38 20 92 400 8464 1840
TOTAL X = 1052 Y = 4483 X2 = Y2 = XY =
30384 542465 126773
Pearson r Calculation:
Here,
N= 38
X = 1052
Y = 4483
X2 = 30384
Y2 = 542465
XY = 126773
Therefore,
r = 38 (126773) – (1052) (4483) / [38 * 30384 – (30384)] [38 * 542465 – (542465)]
r = 0.644
Individual data result
The participants' self-esteem score was 27. The happiness score was 124.
Post task questions
1) How was your overall experience of taking these tests?

a. It really made them think about life.
2) What were your thoughts when you responded to the first test?
a. They were really sad after answering it.
3) What were your thoughts when you responded to the second test?
a. They were more sad after they answered it.
4) Was there any particular event/incident that had happened today or in the recent past
which influenced your responses to these test items today? If yes, what was the prominent
feeling you experienced as a result of that incident?
a. Not today but they have had many incidents like that in the past. Being reminded of the
incidents affected their response to other questions.
Group data
A total of 38 participants were asked to participate in two tests namely Rosenberg Self
Esteem Scale and the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire. The scores obtained on both the tests
were then used to calculate the mean, variance and standard deviation. The mean scores on the
Rosenberg Self Esteem Scale and the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire are 27.684 and 117.974
respectively i.e. the mean of the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire is higher than that of
Rosenberg Self Esteem Scale. The variance of the Rosenberg Self Esteem Scale is 34.060 and
variance of Oxford Happiness Questionnaire is 367.270. The standard deviations of both the tests
were 5.836 and 19.164, for Rosenberg Self Esteem Scale and Oxford Happiness Questionnaire
respectively. Cronbach’s alpha is a measure used to assess the reliability, or internal consistency,
of a set of scale or test items. In other words, the reliability of any given measurement refers to
the extent to which it is a consistent measure of a concept, and Cronbach’s alpha is one way of
measuring the strength of that consistency. With the purpose of measuring the Internal
Consistency Reliability of Self Esteem Scale, the Cronbach’s Alpha Index was calculated. The
obtained Cronbach’s value for this scale was 0.85. Cronbach Alpha’s typical value ranges from 0
to 1. As the value obtained for this score was 0.85 it can be said that the Internal Consistency for
the Self Esteem Scale is ‘Good’ and can also be said that it indicates ‘high’ reliability. There
were some sources of error variance which were operated while administering the experiment.
1. Mental state of the participant - if participant is not in good mood then there will
be a more chances the participant can respond to the test negatively
2. The understanding of questions-might not understand on the questionnaire and the

self-esteem scale so that can result into the wrong answers for wrongly answering the questions
3. Sentence formation of the questions- the question is there were the sentences which
were negatively form so that can result into the lack of understanding of the question to answer
4. Conduction error - there will be the chances that the experimental had not conducted
the experiment on not given the instruction in a proper manner so that participant may not
understand what should be done there and how to solve questionnaire
5. Lack of proper rapport - rapport with the participant can work as one of the error in
the experiment
6. Interest of the participant- willingness to participate in an experiment can affect the

score. After doing all the calculations the reliability found here is 0.87. The good reliability score
is between 0.9 to 0.8. The score of reliability coefficient is 0.87 which is higher. This is a
moderate positive correlation, which means there is a tendency for high X variable scores to go
with high Y variable scores (and vice versa).
The P-Value is .000013. The result is significant at p < .05
CONCLUSION:
Internal consistency reliability estimate (Cronbach’s Alpha index) was fund to be 0.850.
The typical range of Cronbach Alpha is 0-1 (where, 0 indicates no similarity and 1 indicates
perfectly identical). As the value obtained is 0.850 (closer to 1), we can say that the test is highly
reliable. Pearson r correlation coefficient between scores on Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale and
Oxford Happiness Questionnaire was found to be 0.644. It was found to be statistically
significant. The normal Pearson R range is -1 to +1 (indicating statistical significance). This
states that Oxford Happiness Questionnaire is valid, and can be used as a criterion for estimating
validity of other scales. As we are correlating our scores of Rosenberg Self-esteem scale and
Oxford Happiness Questionnaire, we can conclude that Rosenberg Self-esteem scale is also
valid.

Afsha Manual

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Afsha Manual

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Afsha Manual

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Manual

Dr. Neeta Tatke

Dr. Neeta Tatke Dr. Radhika Mohan

Paper VIII: Practicals in Cognitive Processes and Psychological Testing

Code Sem Course Title Credits Marks

E. One Psychological Test

A. Introduction to Experimental Psychology and Statistics in Psychological Research

Internal 40 marks Practical examination of 2 hours 60 marks

Books for reference

A. Introduction to Experimental Psychology and Statistics in Psychological Research

The first four topics in Introduction to Experimental Psychology and Statistics in

Measurement is the way of assigning numbers or symbols to characteristics of people or things

14 A +ve Vegetarian 110 20,000 Lower 547 58 B

Scale of Graphical representation Measures of central Inferential statistics

Calculations – (sample data tables)

Blood group Frequency Food preference Frequency

Variable Data Median Rank

Sr. no. IQ scores Marks

Person Income (per month) Time taken to solve a puzzle (in

Socio economic class – 1 = Upper, 2= Middle, 3 = Lower

5. Report writing – APA format

1. It should not be more than 12 words.

1. Should not be more than 120 words.

1. First word after full stop and Colon.

1. Titles of books, periodicals, microfilms.

B. Practice Exercises – Two exercises

1. A sample Experimental Situation is given below,

An experiment was conducted to study the effect of exercise on improvement of immune

2. A sample set of Variables is given below,

Consumption of food (Nutritious vs Junk) on aggressive behavior in middle childhood

Advantages of Random Groups Design

Disadvantages of Random Group Design

Independent variable - Consumption of food:

Dependant variable- Aggression:

Advantages of Random Groups Design:

Disadvantages of Random Group Design:

C. One Practice Experiment

Practice experiment – Anchoring and Adjustment

Question no. Anchor Estimate high/low Actual estimated no.

Mean estimated percentages

P’s High anchor Low anchor

1. On an average, what percentage of typing is done with the left hand?

Pooled Var 58.69545128

Results and discussions:

D. Two Experiments in Cognitive Processes

A. The Automatic Vigilance Experiment

TITLE: The Automatic Vigilance Experiment

OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS OF THE VARIABLES:

Name (Optional) Age Class Emotional State

Apparatus and Materials

Colour naming time in seconds No. of words recalled

Undesirable trait words Desirable trait words

Undesirable trait words Desirable trait words

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION:

Undesirable trait words

Row Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4

1 Red modern Pink cruel Brown Violent Green unforgiving

2 Green unknown Blue biased Red boastful Brown brutal

3 Brown harmless Green listless Blue dismissive Orange conniving