Pарer Two: Generаl outlіne and maіn points
(Introduсtion)
• Main points to be addressed in Intro:
o Stereotyping (describe) can get the definition from a legit dictionary only
o Stigma (describe)
o 3- articles 1 is DePaulo, B.M., & Morris, W.L. (2005). Singles in society and in science. Psychological Inquiry,
16, 57-83. And the other 2 Research in the 80-90ies documents negative bias toward never-married individuals
o 30 years later, we want to know if the bias persists.
• Clarify why we think that things might have changed: acceptance of alternative lifestyles, etc.
• Underscore that the cultural norm (i.e. marriage as the norm) seems to persist, nevertheless
• Paragraph 2
• Give 3 findings that address trustworthiness and marital status
• Give 3 findings about emotional stability and marital status
• Paragraph 3
• Finally, state your hypothesis, married men are perceived as more trustworthy and more emotionally stable than never married men”
Method
Participants
• State how many students participated in the study – 120; ‘for course credit’
• Gender breakdown: 60 male, 60 female
• Age: median age = 20; 95% between 18-22
Materials
• DVD and a follow-up questionnaire
• Describe DVD both versions showed a 42-year-old male in a job interview for a therapist position in a college counseling center. The two versions used the same actor and were almost identical except that in one DVD the actor described himself as married and in the other as never-married. Next, based on the “DVD transcript” distributed in class, describe the job interview in 3-4 sentences, e.g., actor talks about his background, is asked to comment on a scenario; discloses his mental health status and how it affected his graduate studies.
• Follow-up questionnaire: consisted of 4 questions – participants were asked if they perceived the interviewee as trustworthy, competent, emotionally stable, and whether they would hire him for the job.
Procedure
• Mention that we had to use deception, i.e. participants were told that the study was about people’s interviewing skills and the participants would have to rate a person on certain dimensions (also mention that at debriefing the purpose of the study was explained)
• Participants were randomly assigned to two groups: group one watched “married man” and group two “never-married man”
• In addition to watching DVD, all participants provided their demographics and answered the follow-up questionnaire where they rated the interviewee on trustworthiness, competence, emotional stability, and answered if they would hire him for the job.

Results – paper 2

A two-tailed t-test was conducted and the married male was perceived as more trustworthy than the never married man: Df=48, critical t = 9.1, p<. 01. Put descriptive stats into APA style.

A two-tailed t-test was conducted and there was not a significant difference between the married and the never married group on the emotional stability measure.

Discussion section – paper 2

Paragraph 1
1. Summarize our findings by putting the “as expected” and the “contrary to expectation” findings in one sentence.
2. Address the unsupported hypothesis on emotional stability. Is there another study that our finding is either congruent or in disaccord with?
3. We want to think about why the emotional stability hypothesis wasn’t supported. One approach is how we designed the study in that the married and the never married man both admit to having a depressive period that interfered with graduate school. Thus, they both seem somewhat unstable to the subjects/participants. Also, the two men admitted to being manipulators when working in marketing.
4. On the hand, maybe times have changed or maybe marriage isn’t associated with emotional stability in males. Also, married people are not seen as necessarily a happy, well-adjusted lot. After all, divorce rates are high and many married people are not satisfied or only marginally so.

Paragraph 2 – the significant finding – trust

1. The married man is seen as more trustworthy and you will need to mention a congruent study.
2. Next, discuss a real world implication such as the married man being seen as trustworthy, and they are more likely to get promoted, have higher salaries, and it’s easier for them to obtain housing. Don’t forget to cite!
3. The single man might be seen as deviant, and violating a norm, which makes him subject to suspicion. The never married male is over 40 and he is not even trying to marry or have a family. If he doesn’t try, it opens the door for negative attributions – here you could add personality traits (not sociable, not reliable, not conscientious and none of those traits are desirable in an employee). All this needs to be cited!

Paragraph 3 –Flaws

1. Flaw of the study: we don’t know whether the bias is that people didn’t think he was trustworthy or if the never married man is perceived as gay. Did we measure a hybrid of two stigmas: the never married and being a gay male?

2. The sample was relatively small. Why is this important?

3. Future research directions!

Abstract
1- What the study is about
2- Describe the subject/participants
3- 2 conditions
4- As expected and contrary stamen
5- Error design (time has change)