The ones who dislike, become disliked (#196)
How to Cite this Report
APA StyleMark J. Brandt. The ones who dislike, become disliked. (2014, June 23). Retrieved 19:02, February 25, 2017 from http://www.PsychFileDrawer.org/replication.php?attempt=MTk2
MLA Style"The ones who dislike, become disliked" Mark J. Brandt. 23 Jun 2014 02:20 25 Feb 2017, 19:02 <http://www.PsychFileDrawer.org/replication.php?attempt=MTk2>
MHRA Style'The ones who dislike, become disliked', Mark J. Brandt, , 23 June 2014 02:20 <http://www.PsychFileDrawer.org/replication.php?attempt=MTk2> [accessed 25 February 2017]
Chicago Style"The ones who dislike, become disliked", Mark J. Brandt, , http://www.PsychFileDrawer.org/replication.php?attempt=MTk2 (accessed February 25, 2017)
CBE/CSE StyleThe ones who dislike, become disliked [Internet]. Mark J. Brandt; 2014 Jun 23, 02:20 [cited 2017 Feb 25]. Available from: http://www.PsychFileDrawer.org/replication.php?attempt=MTk2
|Reference to Original Report of Finding||Gawronski, B., & Walther, E. (2008). The TAR effect: When the ones who dislike become the ones who are disliked. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(9), 1276-128|
|Title||The ones who dislike, become disliked|
|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 4|
|Link to PDF of Original Report||View Article|
|Brief Statement of Original Result||From the abstract: "...a source's evaluations of other individuals can recursively transfer to the source, such that people who like others acquire a positive valence, whereas people who dislike others acquire a negative valence (Transfer of Attitudes Recursively; TAR)." Essentially, people who do not like others are not liked by different others. I replicated the 4th Experiment where source evaluations are given in the 1st person and both implicit and explicit measures are used.|
|Type of Replication Attempted||Highly Direct Replication|
|Result Type||Successful Replication|
|Difference?||Same Direction, .001|
|Number of Subjects||89|
|Number of Subjects in Original Study||96|
|Year in which Replication Attempt was Made||2014|
|Name of Investigators (Real Names Required)||Mark J. Brandt|
|Detailed Description of Method/Results||
All materials were acquired from the original authors and translated into Dutch. This replication was the "replication" half of a replication-extension study. All of the extension-related measures were after the original manipulations, materials, etc. |
Participants observe a number of people making statements about other people who work with them in an office. Participants are asked to form an impression of the people as if they were just getting to know the people in the office. On the key trials, a person indicated they liked or disliked the other individuals in the office. After this task, participants completed explicit liking (1 not at all, 9 very much) and implicit liking (the AMP) measures in a counter-balanced order. The explicit and implicit measures for the target who either liked or disliked the others were the key dependent variables.
Two participants were excluded because they indicated that they were familiar with Chinese characters, like those used in the AMP, but including these participants does not affect the results and the results with the full sample are reported below.
On the explicit measure, the person who disliked others was seen more negatively (M = 2.16, SD = 1.64) than the person who liked others (M = 5.89, SD = 2.20), F(1,85) = 80.65, p<.001, np2 = .49. There were no main effect or interaction order effects (p > .52).
On the implicit measure (the AMP), the person who disliked others was seen more negatively (M = .44, SD = .22) than the person who liked others (M = .57, SD = .14), F(1,85) = 10.57, p=.002, np2 = .11. There was no main effect of order (p = .29), but there was a small interaction, F(1,85) = 4.12, p = .045, np2 = .05. When explicit was first, the effects of the condition on the implicit measure were much stronger, F(1, 85) = 13.79, p < .001, np2 = .14, than when the implicit measure was first, F(1, 85) = .75, p = .39, np2 = .009.
Explicit and implicit attitudes were significantly correlated, r (87) = .39, p < .001, consistent with the mediation reported in the paper. And indeed, explicit attitudes mediate the association between the like/dislike experimental condition and the implicit measure (indirect effect = 4.5, SE = 2.2, 95% CI .52, 8.73).
|Any Known Methodological Differences |
(between original and present study)?
|The study was conducted in Dutch instead of English and with Dutch participants instead of Canadian participants. I also included additional measures after the manipulations and measures of the original study that I am not reporting this this replication report.|
|Email of Investigator|
|Name of individuals who |
actually carried out the project
|Tilburg University Experimental Social Psychology Lab|
|Location of Project||Netherlands|
|Characteristics of Subjects |
(subject pool, paid, etc.)
|University students from subject pool|
|Where did these subjects reside?||Netherlands|
|Was this a Class Project?||No|
|Further Details of Results as pdf|
|Email of Original Investigator|
|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|