State the null and alternative hypotheses for this study Suppose the test the researchers conducted to compare the “explicit zero” and “hidden zero” conditions provide a p value of .043. Assuming they used an alpha level of .05, what decision should the researchers make regarding the null hypothesis for this comparison?
State the null and alternative hypotheses for this study
Suppose the test the researchers conducted to compare the “explicit zero” and “hidden zero” conditions provide a p value of .043. Assuming they used an alpha level of .05, what decision should the researchers make regarding the null hypothesis for this comparison?
Purpose of the Study. Because impulsivity is negatively related to important variables (academic achievement, social adjustment, etc.), the authors conducted a study to investigate whether the way choices are presented to people affects impulsivity. They investigated the use of what is called a “hidden zero” presentation of choices, where people are asked to choose between two options (e.g., Would you rather have $5 today or $6 in 6 months?) where the options when they receive nothing (e.g., $5 and $0 in 6 months) are not explicitly stated. This is how choices are typically presented to participants in studies examining this type of impulsivity. However, because other research (e.g., Tversky & Kahneman, 1981) has shown that the way choices are presented to people can influence their choices, the authors decided to compare the “hidden zero” presentation described above with an “explicit zero” presentation to see if there is an effect of how the zero options are stated. In the “explicit zero” presentation, the cases where the person receives nothing is explicitly stated (e.g., Would you rather have $5 today and $0 in 6 months or $0 today and $6 in 6 months?). The researchers looked for a difference between these zero option conditions on impulsivity.
Method of the Study. An Internet sample completed a questionnaire where they either made choices in the “hidden zero” condition or they made choices in the “explicit zero” condition. The choices were between small dollar amounts ($2 to $8.40), where a small amount was offered today or a slightly larger amount was offered after a delay (7 to 140 days). Two samples completed the questionnaire. One sample was told that the choices were hypothetical, whereas the other sample was told that they would receive one of their choices from the study chosen at random. Half of each sample completed all choices with the “hidden zero” condition and the other half of each sample completed all choices with the “explicit zero” condition. Impulsiveness was measured by the number of smaller, sooner choices made by each participant.
Results of the Study. Results were similar for the two samples (hypothetical and real money choices), so results are presented for both samples together. Impulsivity was found to be significantly lower in the “explicit zero” condition (overall mean number of sooner choices was 5.26) than in the “hidden zero” condition (overall mean number of sooner choices was 7.69) of the study.
Conclusions of the Study. The results of the study indicated that the presentation of choices affected the measured impulsivity of the participants. When an “explicit zero” case was included in the choice, people were less impulsive than when the zero case was not explicitly stated. The authors concluded that the mere mention of the “downsides” of choices (i.e., the zero cases in the choices) can decrease impulsivity in the choices.
Trending now
This is a popular solution!
Step by step
Solved in 4 steps with 1 images
