Self-Awareness generates negative impact?
Answers
Answer:
Due to an oversight on our part, we had used an older version of the Self-esteem IAT that was programmed before the publication of the new scoring algorithm (Greenwald et al., 2003). As a result, data from the practice blocks of the IAT were not recorded and were thus not used in calculating participants' IAT scores. We otherwise followed all steps of the new scoring algorithm.
We also conducted a hierarchical multiple regression analysis using the post-manipulation negative affect as the dependent variable and the pre-manipulation negative affect as a covariate entered in the first step of the regression. ESE, ISE, and self-awareness condition were entered in the second step, the two-way interaction terms in the third step, and the three-way interaction term in the fourth step. This analysis yielded a similar pattern of results, although the effects were not significant at the conventional α = .05 level. Specifically, this analysis revealed a three-way interaction at β = −0.17, t(135) = −1.63, p = .105. There was a marginally significant ESE × ISE interaction in the self-awareness condition, β = −0.31, t(135) = −1.72 p = .089, but not in the control condition, β = −0.05, t(135) = −0.59, p = .555. Decomposition analysis showed that high ISE/low ESE participants scored marginally higher on post-manipulation negative affect in the self-awareness condition than in the control condition, β = −0.39, t(135) = −1.85, p = .067. Within the self-awareness condition, high ISE/low ESE participants also scored marginally higher on post-manipulation negative affect than high ISE/high ESE participants, β = −0.46, t(135) = −1.70, p = .092.
MARK ME AS BRAINLIEST !!
Answer:
frrreeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee