Keynote Address by:


Brad A. Alford, Ph.D.

The University of Scranton

Co-Author with Aaron T. Beck: Integrative Power of Cognitive Therapy
Co-Author with David A. Clark and Aaron T. Beck: Scientific Foundations of Cognitive Therapy

 

Cognitive Neurobiology of Depression

 

 

 

Partial Funding Provided by:

The University of Scranton Student Government

A Grant from Psi Chi,

&

Generous Contributions of Alumni:

Keith Gunn

Colleen Phillips

 

 

Organized by:

Association for Psychological Science Student Caucus

The University of Scranton


2008 Conference

 

 

Faculty………………………………………………………………………………….….J. Timothy Cannon

 

Student Co-Chairs………………………………………………………………………....Jessica Biviano

……………………………………………………………………………………………..Kayla Smith

………………………………………………………………………………………...…...Jennifer Johnson

 

 

 

 

 

 

We extend our thanks to APSSC student volunteers, the University Print Shop, the Mailroom, Aramark, Donna Rupp, and University Maintenance.


Schedule of Events

9:30- 10:30

Registration (Brennan Hall, Lobby)

10:30- 10:45

Introduction & Welcome (Brennan Hall, Rm 228)

10:45-12:00 

Keynote Address (Brennan Hall, Room 228)

Cognitive Neurobiology of Depression

Brad A. Alford, Ph.D.
The University of Scranton

12:15- 1:15

Lunch (Brennan Hall, 5th Floor Dining Room)

1:30-3:00

Workshops

 

Applying To Graduate School in Psychology: A Mini Workshop
Thomas P. Hogan, Ph.D.
&
John C. Norcross, Ph.D.

The University of Scranton
(Brennan Hall, Room 203)

The Science of Sex Difference in Science and Mathematics
Authored byDiane F. Halpern, Camilla P. Benbow, David C. Geary, Ruben C. Gur, Janet Shibley Hyde, and Morton Ann Gernsbacher
Reviewed by:
Christie Karpiak, Ph.D.

The University of Scranton
(Brennan Hall, Room 228)

Free Will?
What Are You Talking About?

   Presented by:
Galen L. Baril, Ph.D.

The University of Scranton
(Brennan Hall, Room 228)

 3:15- 4:30

Poster Session (Brennan Hall, 5th Floor Atrium)

 

 

 


Table of Contents

Joint Workshop. 6

The Science of Sex Differences in Science and Mathematics. 6

Free Will? What Are You Talking About?. 6

Workshop. 6

Applying to Graduate School in Psychology: A Mini Workshop. 6

Poster Session. 7

Comparison of SPSS/PC and MINITAB for Conducting Multiple
Regression Analysis. 7

Reliability of Measurement Estimation Skill 8

Am I really hearing that? An Experimental Investigation of
the Audibility of Compact Disc Tweaks. 9

The Role of Uncertainty in Auditory Backward Recognition Masking. 10

An Irrelevant Color Singleton Captures Attention under High-
vs.-Low-Working Memory Load. 11

Local Processing Increases False Identifications. 12
An Analysis of Gender Differences in Performance on
Piaget’s Water-Level Task and Failure to Find Relationships
with 2D:4D Finger Ratios……………………………...……………………………...13

The Effect of Synchronous vs. Asynchronous Gestures in
Early Language Learning. 14

The Effect of Dynamic vs. Static Gestures in Early Language Learning. 15
Differences in Physical Signs of Aggression in BALB/c Mice as a
Function of Home Cage Enrichment ...……………………………………………….16

Effects of Environmental Enrichment in Standard Cages on Open Field
and Elevated Plus Maze Behaviors in BALB/c Mice...……………………………….17

Occurrence and Perception of Traumatic Events in Relation to Anxiety,
Depression, and Somatization ..……………………………………………………….18

The Therapist’s Therapist: Selection Criteria and Demographic Congruence. 19

Do We Practice What We Preach? Why Psychotherapists Decline Personal
Therapy. 20

Getting In and Getting Money: GRE Scores, Acceptance Rates, and
Financial Assistance in APA-Accredited Clincal Programs. 21

"College Students’ Perceive Professors with Doctoral Degrees to be More Intelligent Than Professors with Other Degrees" …..…………………………………………….22

Forgiveness, Reconciliation, and Religiosity Among College Students
and Elders ……………………………………………………………………………..23

Informed Consent: Do Students Read Consent Forms or Know their Rights?. 24

Presenters. 25

 

 

 





 

 

 

 

Keynote Address

 

 

 

 

 

Cognitive Neurobiology of Depression

 

 

 

Given by:

 

Brad A. Alford, Ph.D.
Co-Author with Aaron T. Beck: Integrative Power of Cognitive Therapy
Co-Author with David A. Clark and Aaron T. Beck: Scientific Foundations of Cognitive Therapy

The University of Scranton

 

 

 

Brennan Hall 228

10:45-12:00

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Joint Workshop


Brennan Hall 228

1:30-3:00

 

The Science of Sex Differences in Science and Mathematics

Authored by: Diane F. Halpern, Camilla P. Benbow, David C. Geary, Ruben C. Gur, Janet Shibley Hyde, and Morton Ann Gernsbacher

Reviewed by: Christie Karpiak, Ph.D.

The University of Scranton

 

 

Free Will? What Are You Talking About?

Presented by: Galen L. Baril, Ph.D.

The University of Scranton

 

 

Workshop

 

Brennan Hall 203

1:30- 3:00

 

Applying to Graduate School in Psychology: A Mini Workshop

Thomas P. Hogan, Ph.D., & John C. Norcross, Ph.D.

The University of Scranton

 


Poster Session

3:15- 4:30

5th Floor Atrium Brennan Hall

 

Board 1

Comparison of SPSS/PC and MINITAB for Conducting Multiple Regression Analysis

Amy Piacente & Thomas P. Hogan

The University of Scranton             

SPSS and MINITAB present 2 popular choices for data analysis by students and faculty in behavioral science statistics and research methods courses.  We systematically compare these 2 statistical packages for conducting analysis of a classic problem in multiple regression: prediction of freshman GPA from SAT – V, Q, and W and HS GPA for 596 cases.  The comparison involves data accession, choices to be made by the researcher for analysis, defaults within each system, and output.

 


Board 2

Reliability of Measurement Estimation Skill

Judith M. Teter & Thomas P. Hogan

The University of Scranton

 

Measurement estimation, the rapid approximation of measures of physical objects, although widely referenced in psychological and educational research, has shown exceptionally low construct consistency.  We developed a systematic test, balanced by type (weight, length, time, counts) and magnitude (small, medium, large) of quantities, to analyze the construct’s internal consistency. The 36-item test was completed by 110 subjects.  We examined internal consistency for the complete test and for subsets of items grouped by type and magnitude.


Board 3

Am I really hearing that? An Experimental Investigation of the Audibility of Compact Disc Tweaks

John E. Waggoner & Gifford Howarth

Bloomsburg University

There is heated debate within the community of recording artists, musicians, and audiophiles over whether digital media (CD’s and MP3’s) are sonically superior to older analog media (long playing albums).  Most audiophiles will argue that LP’s sound significantly better than CD’s.  However, since most music is now released on CD’s, audiophiles have had no choice but to listen to the supposedly inferior sound of the CD.   In an effort to improve the sound of CD’s, individuals in the audio industry have developed a number of ‘tweaks’.   Many of these tweaks are quite expensive and employ mysterious mechanisms.   There is little, if any, objective research on whether these tweaks actually work, or whether their supposed effects are akin to placebos.  The purpose of this study was to provide a controlled  investigation of whether one particular CD tweak has audible effects on the sound of compact discs.   A group of 20 students in an audio-recording major listened to tracks from 2 pairs of CD’s, some of which had been treated with a tweak.  They indicated whether they heard a difference between the CD’s, and which CD sounded better to them.   While performance was at chance levels on one pair of CD’s, participants were able to detect differences at above chance levels on the other pair and preferred the sound of the tweaked CD over the sound of the untweaked CD. 

 


Board 4

The Role of Uncertainty in Auditory Backward Recognition Masking

Brandon Bassile & Richard E. Pastore

Binghamton University (SUNY)

 

Auditory Backward Recognition Masking (ABRM), interference in pitch recognition for relatively brief target stimuli caused by a later occurring stimulus, is conjectured to reflect interference in sensory memory or pitch processing. Uncertainty masking, the product of stimulus variability, may provide another source of interference in the pitch recognition decision. Studied only under minimal uncertainty conditions, the contribution of uncertainty effects to ABRM may be underestimated. In non-laboratory conditions, more natural variability in the later occurring masking stimulus adds uncertainty to the pitch decision, and would likely enhance ABRM.  In the current experiment, ABRM is investigated for judging the relative pitch of brief targets (12ms to 48ms) separated by a musical Fifth followed by one of three maskers: single tones either lower or intermediate in frequency to the targets, or a mixture of these maskers. Significant ABRM was found under both minimal (constant masker) and high uncertainty (variable masker) conditions. Further, there was a significant reduction in accuracy in the variable masker condition from the constant masker conditions for all three maskers. These results suggest that uncertainty masking (common to more natural stimuli) plays an important role in auditory information processing and needs to be considered in the study of auditory phenomenon such as ABRM.


Board 5

An Irrelevant Color Singleton Captures Attention Under High-vs.-Low-Working Memory Load

Bryan R. Burnham

The University of Scranton

Attentional capture is the finding that the response time to locate a visual target item is slowed when a salient singleton item appears in the same visual field as the target (e.g., a single green item among red items), compared to when the singleton is absent. Such findings suggest that human attention is sensitive to distinct items in a visual field. However, research has shown that a singleton can be ignored if its feature and a target’s feature are held constant across trials. This is, presumably, because complete top-down knowledge about which visual features are relevant and which are irrelevant is possible, allowing a conscious control of. This study examined whether a singleton captures attention when observers have top-down knowledge about which visual features are relevant and irrelevant, but are prevented from using that knowledge because working memory is overloaded. In two experiments, observers searched for a target letter among other nontarget letters and tried to ignore a color singleton that was present on half of the trials. Observers performed this visual search task under both a low-working memory load and a high-working memory load. The results indicated that observers could control attention and ignore the singleton (i.e., it didn’t capture attention) under low-working-memory load but not under high-working-memory load; however, this was so only when the singleton was task-irrelevant. When it was task-relevant the singleton captured attention whether working memory load was low or high. The results strongly suggest that working memory is critical for the control of attention and for suppressing involuntary shifts of attention to distracting information.

 


Board 6

Local Processing Increases False Identifications

Dr. Robert Ryan, Bevin Lustman, Sam Elbeleidy, Kirsten Williams, & Samantha Scott

Kutztown University

Schooler & Engstler Schooler (1990) found that describing a face impairs people’s ability to recognize it. Subsequent studies suggested that the impairment occurs because describing a face shifts the way people process faces. When describing a face, people use local processing. When recognizing faces, people use global processing. According to the processing shift mechanism, after describing a face, people try to recognize faces by using the same kind of processing they used to describe it. Unfortunately, the local processing upon which describing relies is not as useful for recognizing faces as the global processing that is usually used. Perfect (2007) supported this mechanism by showing that directly shifting people's processing from global to local has the same effect on face recognition as describing the face.

 

This processing shift has mostly been shown to have a detrimental effect on correct identifications. Therefore, in this study we examined the effects of the processing shift on false identifications as well as correct identifications. Lindsay and Wells (1985) have shown that people make fewer false identifications on lineups in which the faces are presented sequentially than on those in which they are presented simultaneously. Therefore, we also examined the effects of the local/global processing shift on both types of lineup.

 

One member of the research team was the target person and another conducted the procedure. After briefly encountering the target, the participant's processing was manipulated either globally or locally by using Navon letters. Next the participant tried to identify the target person from a lineup. The lineups were either target present or absent, and either simultaneous or sequential.

 

For the sequential lineup only, global processors outperformed the local processors across the target present and target absent lineups. Our findings showed that global processing results in more correct identifications and fewer false identifications.


Board 7

 

An Analysis of Gender Differences in Performance on Piaget’s Water-Level Task and Failure to Find Relationships with 2D:4D Finger Ratios
Eva Piatek, Rebecca Guenther, Christina Irace, and J. Timothy Cannon

The University of Scranton & Millersville University

           

Piaget’s Water-Level Task is one of several tests of visuospatial abilities that reliably show gender differences with males performing at a higher level than females (Hines, 2004). Much research suggests that prenatal exposure to androgens may play an important role in determining how “male” or “female” a brain develops (Manning, 2002; Baron-Cohen, 1999; Hines, 2004).  The ratio of the lengths of the second and fourth digits (2D:4D ratio) is an index of prenatal androgen exposure (Manning, 2002; Manning, Baron-Cohen, Wheelwright, & Sanders, 2001).  2D:4D ratio has been examined in relation to many human characteristics, including: fertility, attractiveness, sexual preference, athletic and musical abilities, verbal fluency, handedness, depression, and various personality traits (Manning, 2002). We measured Water-Level Task performance and 2D:4D Finger Ratio in two studies that also examined personality variables or additional visuospatial tasks (data reported elsewhere).  Here we specifically report on our now fairly extensive data set (N = 316) involving Water-Level and 2D:4D Ratio (right hand only).  Overall, males made fewer Water-Level Task errors than females. There were drawing few errors (> 5o deviation from horizontal) found for vertical bottles, intermediate numbers for horizontal, and the greatest for oblique. There was no sex difference for vertical bottles.  Males made significantly fewer errors on both horizontal and oblique bottles.  As expected, 2D-4D ratio was significantly higher for females, however, no significant relationships were found between this ratio and performance measures on the Water-Level Task.

 

 

 


Board 8

 

The Effect of Synchronous vs. Asynchronous Gestures in Early Language Learning

Joyce A. Hayden, Research Team 4, and Nancy Rader

Ithaca College

 

Research suggests that caregivers can aid infant language learning through eye gaze and dynamic gestures. In this study, we examined the importance of synchrony when using gestures to teach new words to infants. For our learning trials, two novel word-object pairs were presented in a digitally edited video, and an eye tracking system was used to locate the infant's attention while they watched it. Fifteen infants aged 9.6 months to 14.7 months were studied using two conditions (synchronous & asynchronous). In the synchronous condition, the object was presented using the same rhythm as the accompanying, spoken word. In the asynchronous condition, the rhythm of the gesture did not match that of the word. We hypothesized that infants would pay more attention to the object when the word was spoken in the synchronous condition. Following the learning trials, comprehension of the word-object pair was tested by asking the infant to look at the objects. This was measured using a ratio of correct looks to total looks. We hypothesized that comprehension would be better for words learned during the synchronous condition. Results of the learning trials and comprehension measures supported both hypotheses. Infants paid more attention to objects in the synchronous condition and showed better comprehension for words learned in this condition.

 


Board 9

The Effect of Dynamic vs. Static Gestures in Early Language Learning

Stephen K. Gillingham, Research Team 04, & Nancy Rader

Ithaca College

 

Research suggests that when teaching a new word to an infant, a caregiver’s directional pointing, eye gaze, and dynamic gestures facilitate infant language learning. These gestures may aid the infant in making the connection between an object and a word when the caregiver presents an object in synchrony with his or her speech. We hypothesized that dynamic gestures would elicit more attention than static held gestures, measured by tracking eye movements. Seventeen infants aged 9.8 to 13.9 months participated in this study. In a digitally edited video, a speaker presented two learning trials which paired a novel object with a novel word using either a dynamic or static gesture. The dynamic condition presented the object so that the rhythm of the gesture matched the word’s rhythm. The static condition presented the word for the object while the object remained still. After the two learning trials, we tested comprehension of the word-object pair by using the video in which the presenter asked infants to look at specific objects. We measured comprehension as a ratio of correct looks to total looks. After analysis, the results from the learning trials show that fixation on the object as the word was being said was greater in the dynamic condition than the static condition. Results also show that infants had better comprehension for words learned in the dynamic condition as opposed to those in the static condition. By using dynamic gestures, caregivers can direct infant attention in a way that encourages joint processing of the object and word. We believe that this joint processing contributes to early word learning.


Board 10

 

Differences in Physical Signs of Aggression in BALB/c Mice as a Function of Home Cage Enrichment

Michael J. Garcia,  Brentt J. Swetter, Christie P. Karpiak, & J. Timothy Cannon

University of Scranton

 

Recent studies of environmental enrichment have focused on improvements of behavioral measures such as anxiety and learning with relatively minor amounts of enrichment in standard size housing units. Differences in enrichment should be expected to correspond with differences in behavior, including aggression. BALB/c mice from Jackson Laboratory were used as breeding stock to obtain 123 subjects. Mice were placed in standard size cages (22 x 16.5 x 13.6 cm high) and randomly assigned to one of four conditions: the control condition received only standard living conditions.  The shelter condition consisted of Mouse Igloo ®.  The novel object condition consisted of Mouse Igloo ® and one of eight toys that was changed every fourth day.  The exercise condition received a Mouse Igloo ® with a Fast Trac ® running wheel and Nestlets ®.  All animals were housed in the same room with a 12/12 dark light cycle and received water and food ad libitum. Animals were routinely examined for aggression, and ratings were determined between 5 and 6 months of age. Physical signs of aggression were measured on a scale of 0-4: 0 - no sign of aggression, 1 - mild hair loss, 2 - moderate to severe hair loss, 3 - some visible broken skin, and 4 - moderate to severe broken skin. Among male BALB/c mice, inclusion of a running wheel corresponded with significantly greater physical signs of aggression than any other housing arrangements.  The novel object condition showed the least aggression.  Further analysis shows these results are predominantly driven by differences in male behavior across the four conditions.  The results support previous findings that the presence of running wheels increase aggression in BALB/c.  The findings also suggest that presence of a Mouse Igloo ® and a novel toy significantly decreases aggressive behavior. 

Board 11

 

Effects of Environmental Enrichment in Standard Cages on Open Field and Elevated Plus Maze Behaviors in BALB/c Mice

Caesar G. Imperio, Brentt J. Swetter, Christie P. Karpiak, and J. Timothy Cannon

The University of Scranton

 

Environmental enrichment of laboratory housing has been shown to produce a number of beneficial effects: decreased maladaptive behaviors, improved spatial memory, and improved health. Enrichment strategies have normally involved much larger than normal housing units that contained a variety of enrichment components. The purpose of this study was to determine if enrichment within a standard shoebox-style housing unit could decrease measures of anxiety in mice. BALB/cJ mice were used because they are considered to be a good model of trait anxiety. Mice were group housed (3-4 per cage) in a standard enclosures (22 x 16.5 x 13.6 cm high) for 6 months in one of four conditions: Standard (woodchip bedding, food and water ad libitum), Igloo (Standard plus igloo), Igloo + Novel Object condition (Sheltered plus one of 8 toys rotated every 3 to 4 days), and Igloo + Running Wheel condition (Sheltered plus running wheel, & Nestles®). Mice from these 4 conditions were then tested during their dark phase on the Elevated Plus and in Open Field to measure anxiety. The Enriched conditions showed decreases in induces of anxiety on the Elevated Plus and the Open Field tests. These results demonstrate that enrichment effects can be produced in standard shoebox-style housing units.


Board 12

Occurrence and Perception of Traumatic Events in Relation to Anxiety, Depression, and Somatization

Allison M. Smith, Radhika Pasupuleti, Cerissa L. Creeden, Ellen Flannery-Schroder

University of Rhode Island

A recent epidemiological study estimated the lifetime prevalence rate of exposure to at least one traumatic event at 90%. Such exposure has been found to be related to poor mental health outcomes including anxiety, depression, and somatization. One’s interpretations of traumatic events may play a role in the development of such forms of psychopathology. However, studies rarely assess whether individuals actually perceived the events as traumatic. There may be differences in outcomes among those who did not experience an event (NO-EV), those who experienced an event but did not perceive it as traumatic (EV-NTR), and those who experienced an event and perceived it as traumatic (EV-TR). It is hypothesized that EV-TR would have the most adverse outcomes. The present study aimed to examine anxiety, depression, and somatization across these groups with regard to eight traumatic events, using the Traumatic Events Scale and Revised Symptom Checklist. Participants (N=232) were undergraduates at a predominantly white, northeastern university. The sample was 60% female, with a median age of 18. Multivariate analyses of variance with Tukey tests were conducted for each event.

           

With divorce, EV-TR reported significantly more somatization than NO-EV. EV-TR also reported significantly more depressive symptoms than NO-EV with traumatic sexual experiences and physical abuse. With illness, EV-TR reported significantly more somatization than NO-EV and more depressive symptoms than both remaining groups. Thus, differences in perceptions of illness were associated with differences in symptom expression. There were no significant group differences in outcomes after death, violence, fire/accident, or disaster. There were also no differences in anxiety across groups. These findings can shape tailor interventions for those with trauma histories. Future research might examine variability across culture and gender.


 

Board 13

The Therapist’s Therapist: Selection Criteria and Demographic Congruence

Danielle M. Schatz, Krystle L. Evans, John C. Norcross, & Denise H. Bike

The University of Scranton

American psychologists, social workers, and counselors (N = 610) described their personal psychotherapists and the criteria used to select them. Competence, warmth, clinical experience, and openness emerged as the top rated of 20 therapist selection criteria. Religion, ethnicity/race, and research productivity were rated low. Mental health professionals tended to choose therapists of the same gender, profession, and theoretical orientation; for example, 61% of women chose female therapists and 70% of psychoanalytic therapists chose psychoanalytic therapists.


Board 14

Do We Practice What We Preach? Why Psychotherapists Decline Personal Therapy

Krystle L. Evans, Danielle M. Schatz, John C. Norcross, & Denise H. Bike

The University of Scranton

The present study probed     ththe reasons that 15 to 25% of psychotherapists do not seek personal therapy across their careers. A national sample of psychologists, social workers, and counselors reported that the most important reasons for not attending personal therapy were having other sources of sufficient support, dealing with stress alternatively, and resolving the problem before therapy was sought. Academicians, cognitive and behavioral therapists were least likely to seek therapy for themselves.
Board 15

Getting In and Getting Money: GRE Scores, Acceptance Rates, and Financial Assistance in APA-Accredited Clinical Programs

Jeannette L. Ellis, John C. Norcross (The University of Scranton), & Michael A. Sayette (University of Pittsburgh)

We surveyed directors of the 232 APA-accredited doctoral programs in clinical psychology (98% response) regarding their acceptance rates, financial assistance, and credentials of incoming students. Results are summarized for all programs and then separately for PsyD, practice-oriented PhD, equal-emphasis PhD, and research-oriented PhD programs. PsyD programs admitted higher percentages of applicants than PhD programs (39% vs. 10%) with lower GRE scores but awarded less full financial assistance (7% vs. 75% of students).  


Board 16

“College Students’ Perceive Professors with Doctoral Degrees to be More Intelligent Than Professors with Other Degrees”.

Stephanie DeGrace

Utica College

 

Previous research has examined the influence of such variables as large class teaching (Papo, 1999), instructors’ fashion (Morris, Gorham, Cohen, & Huffman, 1996), professors’ teaching habits (Miley and Gonsalves, 2003), ideal traits of male and female college professors (Rubin 1981), and teacher qualifications on perception of professors. (Okpala and Ellis, 2005). Surprisingly, little research has been conducted on the topic of perception of college professors in terms of their education level. This study was designed to examine college students’ perceptions of college professors with different levels of education. Participants read a short vignette and rated the professors described in the vignette. In each vignette, the professor had one of the following four levels of education: bachelor’s degree, master’s degree, doctoral degree, or no degree specified. The data revealed that participants believed that professors with the highest education level ( i.e., doctoral degree) were smarter than all other education levels (F (3, 66) = 3.76, p > .05). The data also revealed that participants believed the professor with no degree specified was more Successful (F (3, 66) = 4.08, p < .05) and also believed the professor’s class would be more difficult than all other education levels (F (3, 66) = 2.7, p < .05).

 


Board 17

Forgiveness, Reconciliation and Religiosity Among College Students and Elders

Laura L. Hafner & Dr. Marion Mason

Bloomsburg University

 

Psychological research on the concept and process of forgiveness has increased dramatically over the past two decades.  The current study investigates individuals’ attitudes toward forgiveness, particularly regarding reconciliation and religious perspectives, among a sample of undergraduate college students and a sample of older adults.  The 71 participants included 56 college students (ages 19 to 40), and 15 elder participants (ages 79 to 96).  College students and older adults were compared in their views on whether forgiveness has a religious quality and on the need for reconciliation.  Participants were asked to complete the Reconciliation and Religion subscales of the Forgiveness Survey (Mason, 2000) and respond to several demographic items, including age, gender, religious importance, and religious preference. The forgiveness as reconciliation factor reflects an individual’s views on repairing a relationship after a painful situation.  Higher scores indicate that both parties need to reconcile in order to move on.  One example statement is:  “I must show someone that I forgive him/her in order for true forgiveness to take place.”  The forgiveness as a religious value factor reflects an individual’s views of a Divine power serving as a model for forgiveness.  Higher scores indicate that their religious beliefs play a large role in their ability to forgive others.  One example statement is:  “It helps me forgive someone else when I think of how God forgives us all.”  Data indicated that older adults valued religion more than the college students and were more likely to view forgiveness as having roots in religion.  It is also clear that regardless of age, those who find religious beliefs more valuable also saw forgiveness as a religious concept.  Conversely, reconciliation was not related to any of the major variables.  Reconciliation appears to vary from person to person regardless of age or value of religion.

 


Board 18

Informed Consent: Do Students Read Consent Forms or Know Their Rights?

Antonio Cillo and Eileen Astor-Stetson

Bloomsburg University

 

Both the federal government (e.g., Department of Health and Human Services) and the American Psychological Association (APA, 2002) specify clear guidelines for what informed consent must include. Given the consistent concern about informed consent there is surprisingly little research on participants’ understanding of their rights (e.g., Bruzzese & Fisher, 2003) or on whether participants even read the informed consent.

 

The present study included two components: an assessment of whether college students read the consent form and a test of college students’ knowledge of their rights as participants.

           

To investigate whether students read the informed consent, imbedded in the informed consent for a survey of variables predicting aggression, a line stated “If you are actually reading this, please put a small x on the top page of the first page of the survey, and please do not tell your friends”. Several weeks later students completed a test of their knowledge of their rights as participants.

           

For the initial component of the study, 202 students returned surveys:  90 (44.55%) included the x. On the second component of the study, a 16 question test of knowledge, the average score was 61.93% .The need for more instruction on participants’ rights and the importance of reading consent will be discussed.


Presenters


Alford, B. A . . ..................................................................................................................... 5

Astor-Stetson, E................................................................................................................. 24

Baril, G. L............................................................................................................................. 6

Bassile, B............................................................................................................................ 10

Bike, D. H.................................................................................................................... 19, 20

Burnham, B. R.................................................................................................................... 11

Cannon, J. T........................................................................................................... 13, 16, 17

Cillo, A............................................................................................................................... 24

Creeden, C. L..................................................................................................................... 18

DeGrace, S......................................................................................................................... 22

Elbeleidy, S......................................................................................................................... 12

Ellis, J. L............................................................................................................................. 21

Evans, K. L................................................................................................................... 19, 20

Flannery-Schroder, E.......................................................................................................... 18

Garcia, M. J........................................................................................................................ 16

Gillingham, S. K.................................................................................................................. 15

Guenther, R......................................................................................................................... 13

Hafner, L. L........................................................................................................................ 23

Hayden, J. A....................................................................................................................... 14

Hogan, T. P.................................................................................................................. 6, 7, 8

Howarth, G........................................................................................................................... 9

Imperio, C. G...................................................................................................................... 17

Irace, C.  ........................................................................................................................... 13

Karpiak, C. P........................................................................................................... 6, 16, 17

Lustman, B.......................................................................................................................... 12

Mason, M........................................................................................................................... 23

Norcross, J. C.................................................................................................... 6, 19, 20, 21

Pastore, R. E....................................................................................................................... 10

Pasupuleti, R....................................................................................................................... 18

Piacente, A........................................................................................................................... 7

Piatek, E............................................................................................................................. 13

Rader, N....................................................................................................................... 14, 15

Research Team 4................................................................................................................ 14

Research Team 04…..........................................................................................................15

Ryan, R............................................................................................................................... 12

Sayette, M. A..................................................................................................................... 21

Scott, S............................................................................................................................... 12

Schatz, D.M.................................................................................................................. 19, 20

Smith, A. M........................................................................................................................ 18

Swetter, B. J................................................................................................................. 16, 17

Teter, J.M............................................................................................................................. 8

Waggoner, J. E..................................................................................................................... 9

Williams, K......................................................................................................................... 12


 


Notes: