The new experimental thing and you will dataset arrive from the
After that 2nd article, professionals complete another short-term survey which included an identical affairs just like the first into comparison of the culprit. A final part worried participants’ number of governmental attract, political thinking-position into the 10-area leftover–proper continuum, intercourse, ages, area of residence and you will education.
Users was basically at random assigned to certainly six experimental standards derived on dos (perpetrator’s gender) ? step three (maintenance tactic) ranging from members factorial build.
Most of the measures performed within studies was indeed according to the moral requirements of your national browse committee along with the 1964 Helsinki endments.
Analysis of the political star
Users said its internationally thoughts into the fictitious politician toward good 10-point scale (1 = entirely negative so you can 10 = totally positive) twice, once in the T1 (post-scandal) as soon as during the T2 (post–protective response). The effectiveness of new protective strategy during the fixing reputation is grabbed from change in investigations of protagonist.
Assessment of one’s politician’s communality and you can agency before and after their or the woman justification of your own scandal
The respondents analyzed the latest scandal perpetrator toward good 5-section level between step 1 (definitely not) in order to 5 (truly) twice, immediately after following scandal (T1) and once adopting the perpetrator’s protective reaction (T2). Members rated the latest perpetrator to the around three adjectives for each with the communality dimensions (truthful, practical and you will empathetic) and you can agencies dimension (calculated, competent and solid; age.grams., Bauer 2017 ). This new indices constructed on the fresh imply facts attained satisfactory precision: ? communality article-scandal = 0.80; ? communality blog post-reason = 0.74; ? department post-scandal = 0.63; ? company blog post-reason = 0.67.
Initial regression analyses including the politician’s appeal, respondents’ sex, respondents’ political orientation, respondents’ quantities of interest in government and you can respondents’ criterion regarding the comparative trustworthiness of females and you will men don’t produce people main nor communications influence on the new situated parameters. As such, they will not be considered from inside the next analyses.
We tested H1 using a 3 (type of defensive tactic) ? 2 (perpetrator’s gender) ANOVA on the global attitude toward the politician after his/her defensive reaction including the previous attitude (T1) as a covariate. The hypothesised two-way interaction between the independent variables proved to be the only significant effect, F (2, 185) = 6.06; p = 0.003; ? 2 p = 0.06 (Figure 1 ). Further inspection of this interaction revealed that the ‘diffusion of responsibility with accusation of another person’ was effective only when used by the man, simple slope = 0.11, SE = 0.04, 95% CI [0.03, 0.19], whereas the ‘excuses with claims of mitigating circumstances’ was effective only when used by the woman, simple slope = 0.09, SE = 0.04, 95% CI [0.00, 0.17]. Finally, contrary to our expectations, ‘mortification with request for forgiveness’ did not vary its efficacy as a function of the best Music dating site politician’s gender, simple slope = 0.00, SE = 0.04, 95% CI [–0.08, 0.08].
Suggest in the world thinking for the an excellent scandal perpetrator given that a function of his/the woman sex additionally the communicative strategy regularly guard him/herself.
Regarding H2, the ANOVA including the agentic and communal dimensions measured at T2 as a repeated factor (and those measured at T1 as covariates) revealed the main effect of the repeated factor, F (1, 184) = 9.13, p = 0.003, ? 2 p = 0.05, signalling that the defensive reactions were globally more effective in improving the perpetrator agentic traits (M = 0.30, SD = 0.17) than the communal ones (M = 0.27, SD = 0.18). This analysis also elicited the two-way interaction between the type of defensive tactic and the repeated factor, F (1, 184) = 9.13, p 2 p = 0.14, indicating that the ‘diffusion of responsibility’ improved the evaluation of the perpetrator on agentic traits more than the other defensive tactics, that did not differ from each other at the LSD post-hoc test, whereas none of the tactics differed from each other as for the efficacy in improving the perceived perpetrator communality. In addition, the two-way interaction between the gender of the politician and the repeated factor, F (1, 184) = , p 2 p = 0.15 showed that the defensive reactions, irrespective of the type, improved the communality traits of the female politician (M = 0.31, SD = 0.19) more than those of the male one (M = 0.23; SD = 0.17), simple slope = 0.06, SE = 0.02, 95% CI [0.02, 0.10], whereas they were equally effective in improving the agentic traits of the male politician (M = 0.32, SD = 0.18) and those of the female one (M = 0.28, SD = 0.16), simple slope = 0.04; SE = 0.02, 95% CI [–0.01, 0.08].