Schmitt, B. H., Gilovich, T., Goore, N., & Joseph, L. (1986). Mere presence and social facilitation: One more time. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22(3), 242-248. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(86)90027-21. According to Zajonc vs. Cottrell, why does the presence of others facilitate performance on simple or well-learned tasks and impair performance on difficult or novel tasks?2. According to Markus (1978), what was wrong with some past social facilitation and impairment studies? How did Schmitt et al. address these problems?3. What was the design of the study of Schmitt et al? Which factor was between groups? How did Schmitt et al. operationalize variables? Why did Schmitt et al. use the cover story of sensory deprivation? 4. Insert mean time, s, to complete tasks from Table 1, p. 246.AudienceTask None, alone Blindfolds, headphones ObservantWell-learnedNovel5. Describe the results in Q4. Did a social facilitation effect occur? Did a social impairment effect occur? Which means did you compare to reach your conclusions?6. Interpret the results in Q4 from the perspectives of Zajonc and Cottrell. Did Schmitt et al. conduct a crucial experiment? Why or why not?7. Why did Schmitt et al. conduct a replication? In the replication, which alternative view of social facilitation and impairment effects of the first study did the researchers negate? How did they accomplish that? Does this refinement address one of Platt’s steps of strong inference? If so,which step?8. According to Schmitt et al., is mere presence sufficient for social facilitation and impairment effects? According to Schmitt et al., is evaluation necessary for these effects?9. Consider Platt’s step 4 of strong inference. The results of Schmitt et al. suggest which theoretical
View Full Document
Unlocking...