Psy 401 Junior Seminar
Fall, 2006
Ungraded (diagnostic, practice) analysis of Schachter & Singer
Due: in class, Sept 5.
I suggest you download the assignment from the Courses Server or my faculty website
(Schachter & Singer analysis.doc), so that you can type in your answers. In addition,
I’d suggest bringing two copies to class, one to hand to me, containing only the WRITE
items, and one for yourself with any other notes you want to make in advance or during
the class discussion.
This paper by Schachter & Singer is a “classic,” cited in almost all textbook accounts of
emotion. It forwards a plausible theory, often referred to as the “two-factor theory” of
emotion. The data reported herein are usually interpreted to support two-factor theory,
although there have been many critiques of the paper and a couple of non-replications.
WRITE: What is two-factor theory? Please include the terms “necessary” and
“sufficient” in your statement of the theory.
THINK (i.e., for discussion): In order to test two-factor theory, one needs to be able
independently to manipulate physiological arousal and cognitively-interpreted
situational factors. How are these manipulated in S&S’s experiment? Think about
other ways to manipulate them.
WRITE: How many independent variables are there? Identify the “levels” of each
independent variable. Which of these variables is/are “between groups” variables?
Which is/are “within subjects”?
WRITE: Is the design of this experiment fully crossed? In other words, is there a
condition corresponding to all the possible combinations of each of the levels of each
of the independent variables? If there are missing conditions, are these important?
WRITE: List the dependent variables. Be sure to describe each fully and as
specifically as possible. For example, it should be possible to describe “pulse rate” as
something like “number of heart beats/minute averaged over the 5 minutes before the
injection procedure and for 5 minutes after all other measurements were taken.” (P.S.
you won’t be able to do this in fact – do the best that you can in this and all other
cases.)
THINK; are there things you cannot describe that might influence the way you interpret
the data? Are there specifics of the measurements that you can describe that you
would have done differently?
THINK: Some of the measurements are presented as validating the experimental
manipulations (i.e., as “manipulation checks”), others are presented as the variables
that test the theory. Is this distinction clear in this experiment? Why or why not?
WRITE: List the primary comparisons of importance to testing two-factor theory in this
experiment. Do this a priori, i.e., list the comparisons you would look for in this paper,
based solely on your understanding of the theoretically motivated questions being
asked and the procedures being used (i.e., independent and dependent variables).
WRITE: Is each of these comparisons reported? What is the finding of each
comparison?
THINK: Are there comparisons of secondary importance that should also be
examined? Should any of the comparisons have been made in a different way?
WRITE: Given the findings summarized above, what conclusions would you draw
about two-factor theory, as tested in this experiment?
WRITE: List the first two things you would do to expand on this experiment, as
reported. These could be changes to the experimental design, the procedural
implementation of the independent variables, the measurement of the dependent
variables, or the data analyses. Why would these be the first things to do?
THINK: What other things would you do?
THINK: Re-frame the theory being tested here in light of Russell’s approach to
defining “core affect” and “emotion.”