Clean Thoughts Lead to Less Severe Moral Judgment (#177)
How to Cite this Report
APA Style
Julia Arbesfeld, Tricia Collins, Demetrius Baldwin, Kimberly Daubman. Clean Thoughts Lead to Less Severe Moral Judgment. (2014, February 13). Retrieved 20:39, May 04, 2018 from http://www.PsychFileDrawer.org/replication.php?attempt=MTc3MLA Style
"Clean Thoughts Lead to Less Severe Moral Judgment" Julia Arbesfeld, Tricia Collins, Demetrius Baldwin, Kimberly Daubman. 13 Feb 2014 08:16 04 May 2018, 20:39 <http://www.PsychFileDrawer.org/replication.php?attempt=MTc3>MHRA Style
'Clean Thoughts Lead to Less Severe Moral Judgment', Julia Arbesfeld, Tricia Collins, Demetrius Baldwin, Kimberly Daubman, , 13 February 2014 08:16 <http://www.PsychFileDrawer.org/replication.php?attempt=MTc3> [accessed 04 May 2018]Chicago Style
"Clean Thoughts Lead to Less Severe Moral Judgment", Julia Arbesfeld, Tricia Collins, Demetrius Baldwin, Kimberly Daubman, , http://www.PsychFileDrawer.org/replication.php?attempt=MTc3 (accessed May 04, 2018)CBE/CSE Style
Clean Thoughts Lead to Less Severe Moral Judgment [Internet]. Julia Arbesfeld, Tricia Collins, Demetrius Baldwin, Kimberly Daubman; 2014 Feb 13, 08:16 [cited 2018 May 04]. Available from: http://www.PsychFileDrawer.org/replication.php?attempt=MTc3| Reference to Original Report of Finding | Schnall, S., Benton, J., & Harvey, S. (2008). With a Clean Conscience: Cleanliness Reduces The Severity Of Moral Judgments. Psychological Science, 19(12), 1219-1222. |
| Title | Clean Thoughts Lead to Less Severe Moral Judgment |
| If the original article contained multiple experiments, which one did you attempt to replicate? e.g., you might respond 'Study 1' or 'Experiment 4'. | Experiment One |
| Link to PDF of Original Report | View Article |
| Brief Statement of Original Result | Activating thoughts about cleanliness reduces the severity of moral judgments. |
| Type of Replication Attempted | Fairly Direct Replication |
| Result Type | Successful Replication |
| Difference? | Same Direction, .03 |
| Number of Subjects | 60 |
| Number of Subjects in Original Study | 40 |
| Year in which Replication Attempt was Made | 2014 |
| Name of Investigators (Real Names Required) | Julia Arbesfeld, Tricia Collins, Demetrius Baldwin, Kimberly Daubman |
| Detailed Description of Method/Results |
We created 20 sets of 4 neutral word scrambles and 10 sets of 4 cleanliness word scrambles. Participants were randomly assigned to one of two conditions. Participants in the cleanliness prime condition were given 10 sets of cleanliness word scrambles and 10 sets of neutral word scrambles. Those in the control condition were given 20 sets of neutral word scrambles. They were asked to unscramble the sentences and were given as much time as needed. Then they proceeded to read six moral dilemmas (the same ones used by Schnall et al.) and were asked to rate them on a scale of 0-9 (the same rating scale) with 0 being âperfectly fineâ and 9 being âextremely immoral.â We calculated the moral severity score for each individual by averaging their ratings of the six dilemmas. A one-tailed independent t-test revealed a significant difference between the two conditions, t(58)=1.84, p=.03. Those primed with cleanliness rated the moral dilemmas as less severe (M=5.96, SD=1.40) than those in the control condition (M=6.57, SD-1.14). The effect size is moderate, Cohenâs d=.48. |
| Any Known Methodological Differences (between original and present study)? | We constructed our own word scrambles for the cleanliness prime and control condition. In the original study they used 40 sets of four word scrambles for each condition whereas we used 20. The sample size in the original study is smaller (n=40) than ours (n=60). |
| Email of Investigator |
|
| Name of individuals who actually carried out the project | Julia Arbesfeld, Tricia Collins, Demetrius Baldwin conducted the study under the supervision of Kimberly Daubman |
| Location of Project | Student Center of Bucknell University, Lewisburg, PA |
| Characteristics of Subjects (subject pool, paid, etc.) | Other Uncompensated male and female university students, age 18-22 |
| Where did these subjects reside? | United States |
| Was this a Class Project? | Yes |
| Further Details of Results as pdf | |
| Additional Comments | |
| Email of Original Investigator |
|
| Quantitive Information | |
| I have complied with ethical standards for experimentation on human beings and, if necessary, have obtained appropriate permission from an Institutional Review Board or other oversight group. | |
| TAG: Attention TAG: JDM TAG: Language TAG: Learning TAG: Memory TAG: Perception TAG: Performance TAG: Problem Solving TAG: Social Cognition TAG: Social Psychology TAG: Thinking | |
