o amnesics exhibit cognitive dissonance reduction?

In phase 4 participants were shown the prints and

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: required to rerank the two sets of prints from Phase 1 to reflect their current liking of them. In Phase 4, participants were shown the prints and asked to identify the 4 prints that constituted the two critical pairs that were used in Phase 2. The participants were then asked to identify each of the 4 prints as having been chosen or rejected in Phase 2. The primary measures were (a) the average change in ranks of the selected and rejected pairs between Phases 1 and 3 and (b) in Phase 4, how accurately participants could identify the prints they had chosen in Phase 2. Method Participants Participants were 12 amnesic patients (9 men and 3 women; for patients’ characteristics, see Table 1) and 12 control participants (8 men and 4 women). They were matched for age (for control participants, M 61.7, range: 43–73; for amnesics, M 64.5, range: 40–80) and years of education (for control participants, M 12.9 years, range: 8–17; for amnesics, M 14.2 years, range: 7–20). Procedure When participants entered the testing room, they were informed that they would be completing some tasks that would allow the experimenter to assess their verbal skills and their aesthetic preferences. In Phase 1, they were given a stack of 15 art prints measuring 3 in. by 5 in. and were asked to rank them in order of preference. A sorting board was placed in front of each participant to help him or her in sorting the cards while making the rankings. Participants sorted a set of 15 cards that reproduced paintings by Claude Monet and a second set of 15 cards that reproduced paintings by unknown Aboriginal artists. The order in which they sorted these two sets was counterbalanced across participants, and the second set was always designated as the critical set. After finishing their rankings, participants completed a filler verbal task called the “city generation task,” which required them to gen- Table 1. Patient characteristics Patient Medial temporal lobe damage A.B. P.D. R.L. J.M. P.S. S.S. Korsakoff’s syndrome P.B. R.D. R.G. W.R. W.K. R.M. Mean Age WAIS–R IQ WMS–R score Attention 59 61 69 49 40 71 105 109 103 89 95 126 92 89 93 95 115 114 72 68 80 70 57 78 64.5 87 83 94 88 94 112 98.8 93 99 104 96 93 95 98.2 Verbal Visual 72 72 70 84 89 104 96 73 75 56 95 100 77 75 58 78 63 88 77.5 94 75 82 85 78 100 84.0 General 76 65 68 70 90 102 82 82 61 76 59 90 76.8 Delayed 50 61 66 52 50 50 60 50 66 53 57 68 59.4 Note. WAIS–R Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale–Revised (Wechsler, 1981); WMS–R Wechsler Memory Scale–Revised (Wechsler, 1987). The WAIS–R and the five WMS–R indices yield a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15 in the normal population. The WMS–R does not provide numerical scores for participants who score below 50. Therefore, such values were scored as 50 for computing means. 136 VOL. 12, NO. 2, MARCH 2001 Downloaded from pss.sagepub.com at COLUMBIA UNIV on April 18, 2013 PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE M.D. Lieberman et al. erate the names of 15 U.S. cities...
View Full Document

This document was uploaded on 01/26/2014.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online