By Emma Moody, Emma Pickup, Ailsa Reid, Rebecca Pearce and Bethan Hamilton.

By Emma Moody, Emma Pickup, Ailsa Reid, Rebecca Pearce and Bethan Hamilton

Background of the study Experiment overview Results Critique

Relevance of the study Priming Sample Extraneous Variables Implications of the findings

Future Research References

21/04/23 2The Psychological Consequences of Money

Money change people’s motivation and behaviour towards others (Lea & Webley, 2006; Amato & Rogers, 1997)

Self-sufficiency Mental Priming

Hypothesis: Reminders of money will lead to changes in behaviour suggesting self sufficiency

Prediction: People reminded of money will want to be free of dependency and would prefer others not be dependent on them

IV: Money priming techniques 21/04/23 3The Psychological Consequences of Money

N = 52

Conditions:1. Money prime2. Play-money3. Control

Procedure: descrambling task, difficult but solvable problem

DV: persistence on the problem before asking for help

Results: worked longer before asking for help if primed


N = 38

Conditions: 1. High money prime2. Low money prime

Procedure: essay read aloud, line tracing task

DV: persistence on an impossible task before asking for help

Results: high money condition worked longer before asking for help


N = 39

Conditions:1.Money prime2.Control

Procedure : descramble task from Ex 1., experimenter asked for help

DV: number of data sheets volunteer to code

Results: volunteered less time if in the money prime


N = 44

Conditions1.Money prime2.Control

Procedure: descramble task from Ex 1., confederate asks for help

DV: time spent helping the confederate

Results: spent less time helping if primed


N = 36

Condition:1.High money2.Low money3.Control

Procedure: Played monopoly, imagine the future, helpful situation

DV: Number of pencils picked up

Results: High money condition gathered less pencils21/04/23 8The Psychological Consequences of Money

N = 44

Conditions:1.Money prime2.Control

Procedure: descramble from Ex 1., donation opportunity

DV: amount of money donated

Result: donated less money if primed21/04/23 9The Psychological Consequences of Money

N = 36

Conditions: 1.Money prime screensaver2.Fish control screensaver3.No-screensaver control

Procedure: irrelevant questionnaires, move chairs to talk to another participant

DV: distance between the two chairs

Result: placed chairs further apart if primed


N = 61

Conditions:1.Money prime poster2.Seascape control poster3.Flower control poster

Procedure: filler questionnaires, activity questionnaire

DV: number of solitary activities selected

Results: chose more individually focused activities if primed21/04/23 12The Psychological Consequences of Money

N = 37

Conditions:1.Money prime screensaver2.Fish control screensaver3.No screensaver control

Procedure: filler questionnaires like Ex 7., asked if want to work alone or with a peer

DV: if opted to work alone or as a group

Result: desire to work with a peer reduced if primed


Ex Priming Method

DV Significance

1 Descramble task

Persistence before asking for help

P < 0.04

2 Essay Persistence before asking for help

P = 0.05

3 Descramble task

Number of data willing to code P < 0.05

4 Descramble task

Time spent helping a peer P < 0.04

5 Monopoly money and future question

Number of pencils gathered P < 0.03

6 Descramble Task

Donation P < 0.05

7 Screensaver Chairs distance (cm) P < 0.05

8 Poster Number of solitary activities P < 0.05

9 Screensaver Opting to work alone P < 0.01


Hypothesis supported

Self-sufficient pattern helps explain why people view money as the greatest good and evil


Money creates self-sufficiency, people to be less helpful and more likely to work on their own.

However Old crumpled money leads toward selfish

behaviours and clean money leads toward reciprocity. (Yang et. al. 2013)

Self-sufficiency does not necessarily cause you to be less helpful. Some self-sufficient people are self-immersed, whereas some have a strong sense of connection to others and a strong sense of empathy


Strahan et al (2002) Certain conditions need to be met1. Goal relevant2. Motivating

Our study complies to these criteria, so the priming should be effective

21/04/23 The Psychological Consequences of Money 18

Smeesters et al (2009) suggest those highly consistent in social value orientation behave according to dispositions, as opposed to primes.

Those with inconsistencies in compassion and empathy towards others will be more susceptible.


ExtraversionJohnson et al (1989) found altruism correlates highly with extraversion.Eysenck defines extraversion partly as high sociability (1981)

How can we be sure that the results are due to being primed with money, and not just the consequences of scoring high on extraversion?


Narcissism The study shows that a feature of self sufficiency is narcissism

How do we know that some of the results do not just stem from people scoring high on narcissism ?


Does fake money have the same effect on us as real money?

Participants were primed with fake money and there is no research to suggest that it has the same effect on humans as real money.


Students were ‘bribed’ to take part with either a small cash payment or credits for a university scheme.

Does this cancel out the effect of the prime?

Does this mean that those who didn’t have the financial prime were in fact primed anyway?


Too small-61 participants, into 3 conditions

Gender and attitudes towards money (Lim, Teo et al. 2003) males find money is power

Gender and donations (Brown-Kruse and Hummels 1993)-men give more often

Women and altruism (Kamas, Preston et al. 2008)-women give larger donations, dependent on gender of group.


More likely to donate in front of opposite sex

Confederates appearance (Benson, Karabenick et al. 1976) (Wilson, 1978). The attractive people were helped more, regardless of other characteristics


Wealth and altruism (Holland J, Silva AS et al. 2012)- richer people were more altruistic

The sample recruited was only students.

Students replies are more homogenous and effect sizes differ in nonstudent populations (Robert A. Peterson 2001)


Social Norms Research does not seem to suggest that males feel socially obligated to help females.Van Vugt and Iredale (2013) found that men helped more with a female audience, whereas women were not affected by gender.Peacocking rather than social obligations.Attractiveness

Probe QuestionAll experiments were followed by a probe questionDruckman (2001) suggested that the framing of questions can affect behaviour.


If richer people bond less with others, relationships may be affected

As you feel less empathy towards others, you will feel less emotional distress. This exclusion causes a desire for money to increase. (Zhou, Vohs & Baumeister, 2009)

Lower class individuals are more compassionate than upper class individuals (Stellar, Manzo, Kraus, & Keltner, 2012)


Include Eastern cultures Western cultures tend to be individualistic Eastern cultures are collectivists and focus on

context rather than content (Triandis,2004)

Measure Personality People scoring high on agreeableness tend to

have more empathy for others and so they will help people more (Graziano, Tobin, Leary & Hoyle, 2009)

Gender21/04/23 The Psychological Consequences of Money 29

Vohs, K.D., Mead, N.L. & Goode, M.R. (2006). The psychological consequences of money. Science, 314, 1154-1156.

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/314/5802/1154.full


Amato, P. R., & Rogers, S. J. (1997). A Longitudinal Study of Marital Problems and Subsequent Divorce. Journal of Marriage and Family, 59(3), 612-624.

Benson, P. L., et al. (1976). "Pretty pleases: The effects of physical attractiveness, race, and sex on receiving help." Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 12(5): 409-415.

Benson, P. L., Karabenick, S. A., & Lerner, R. M. (1976). Pretty pleases: The effects of physical attractiveness, race, and sex on receiving help. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 12(5), 406-415.

Brown-Kruse, J. and D. Hummels (1993). "Gender effects in laboratory public goods contribution: Do individuals put their money where their mouth is?" Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 22(3): 255-267.

Druckman, J. N. (2001). The Implications of Framing Effects for Citizen Competence. Political Behavior. 23(3), 225-256.

Eysenck, H. J. (Ed.). (1981). A model for personality. New York: Springer.


Graziano, W.G., Tobin, R.M., Leary, M.R., & Hoyle, R.H. (2009). Handbook of individual differences in social behaviour. New York, NY, US: Guildford press, 46-61.

Holland J, et al. (2012). "Lost Letter Measure of Variation in Altruistic Behaviour in 20 Neighbourhoods." PLoS ONE 7(8).

Johnson, R. C., et al. (1989). "Cross-cultural assessment of altruism and its correlates." Personality and Individual Differences 10(8): 855-868.

Kamas, L., et al. (2008). "Altruism in individual and joint-giving decisions: What's gender got to do with it?" Feminist Economics 14(3): 23-50.

Lea, S. E. G., & Webley, P. (2006). Money as tool, money as drug: The biological psychology of a strong incentive. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 29(2), 161-196.

Lim, V. K. G., et al. (2003). "Sex, financial hardship and locus of control: an empirical study of attitudes towards money among Singaporean Chinese." Personality and Individual Differences 34(3): 411-429.


Price, R.H., J.N. Choi and A.D. Vinokur, 2002. Links in the chain of adversity following job loss of personal control lead to depression, impaired functioning and poor health. J. Occup. Health Psychol., 7: 302-312.

Robert A. Peterson (2001). "On the Use of College Students in Social Science Research: Insights from a Second‐Order Meta‐analysis." Journal of Consumer Research 28(3): 450-461.

Smeesters, D., et al. (2009). "When do primes prime? The moderating role of the self-concept in individuals’ susceptibility to priming effects on social behavior." Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 45(1): 211-216

Stellar, J.E., Manzo, V.M., Kraus, M.W., Keltner, D. (2012). Class and Compassion: Socioeconomic factors predict responses to suffering. Emotion

Strahan, E. J., et al. (2002). "Subliminal priming and persuasion: Striking while the iron is hot." Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 38(6): 556-568.

Triandis, H.C. (2004). The many dimensions of culture. ACAD Manage perspect 18(1), 88-93


Van Vugt, M., & Iredale, W. (2013). Men behaving nicely: Public goods as peacock tails. British Journal of Psychology, 104(1), 3-13.

Wilson, D. W. (1978). Helping behavior and physical attractiveness. The Journal of Social Psychology. 104(2), 313-314.

Yang, Q., Wu, X., Zhou, X., Mead, N.L., Vohs, K.D., & Baumeister, R.F. (2013). Diverging effects of clean versus dirty money on attitudes, values and interpersonal behaviour. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Zhou, X., Vohs, K.D., & Baumeister, R.F. (2009). The Symbolic Power of Money Reminders of Money Alter Social Distress and Physical Pain. Psychological Science


By Emma Moody, Emma Pickup, Ailsa Reid, Rebecca Pearce and Bethan Hamilton.

Documents

Transcript of By Emma Moody, Emma Pickup, Ailsa Reid, Rebecca Pearce and Bethan Hamilton.