12.28 Racism, Juries, and interactions: In a study of racism, Nail, Harton, and

Question

12.28 Racism, Juries, and interactions:

In a study of racism, Nail, Harton, and Decker (2003) had participants read a scenario in which a police officer assaulted a motorist. Half the participants read about an African American officer who assaulted an European American motorist, and half read about a European American officer who assaulted an African American motorist. Participants were categorized based on political orientation: liberal, moderate, or conservative. Participants were told that the officer was acquitted on assault charges in state court but found guilty of violating the motorist’s rights in federal court. Double jeopardy occurs when an individual is tried twice for the same crime. Participants were asked to rate, on a scale of 1-7, the degree to which the officer had been placed in double jeopardy by the second trial.

The researchers reported the interaction as F= (2,58)=10.93, p<0.0001. The means for the liberal participants were 3.18 for those who read about the African American officer and 1.91 for those who read about the European American officer. The mean for the moderate participants were 3.50 for those who read about the African American officer and 3.33 for those who read about the European American officer. The means for the conservative participants were 1.25 for those who read about the African American officer and 4.62 for those who read about the European American officer.

b. Do the reported statistics indicate that there is a significant interaction? If yes, describe the interaction in your own words.

d. Is this a quantitative or qualitative interaction? Explain.

e. Change the cell mean for the conservative participants who read about an African American officer so that this is now a quantative interaction.

g. Change the cell mean for the moderate and conservative participants who read about an African American officer so that this is now no interaction.

Explanation / Answer

b. From the f-test statistic, f=2.58 = 10.93, p<0.0001, there is no significant interactiion among the participants categorized on the political background.

Irrespective of the participants' political orientation, all the participants who have participated, were in the position of 50/50. So nobody is 100% sure who committed the offence if it was an African american or European American.

With a p-value of less than 0.0001 which is less than the significance level alpha of 99%(alpha 0.01), we have the sufficient evidence to support the claim that half of the participants read African American and other Half of the participants read European American.

d. It is an qualitative interaction among the three different categories. The mean values are the proportion of the extremes or the median or mid value on a scale of 1-7 rating about the severity of the repeated offence that would result in double punishments.

e. Changing the cell means wont change the interaction that resulted due to the count of the low to high scale values. It is an discrete numbers counted and tabulated with the counts in an interval of 1-2, 2-3, ..6-7. So I don’t think that changing the cell means will change the nature of the interaction among the categories.

g. There is no significant interaction among all these three categories. We can change the means to make it having an interaction.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse 1
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.