100% satisfaction guarantee Immediately available after payment Both online and in PDF No strings attached
logo-home
CLUE PAPER: Method section $7.03   Add to cart

Other

CLUE PAPER: Method section

 5 views  0 purchase
  • Course
  • Institution

- Method section (with calculations such as t-test, chi-sqaured test etc.) - Referenced for entire paper - Appendix - Received Grade: 8.5

Preview 2 out of 10  pages

  • July 5, 2023
  • 10
  • 2022/2023
  • Other
  • Unknown
avatar-seller
CLUE – Method Section
3.1 Materials
For this study, an online experiment with six conditions was conducted. The independent
variables of this study included prejudice control instructions (direct vs indirect vs no control)
and non-native accent strength (slight vs moderate). To begin the experiment subjects were
given one set of prejudice control instructions with varying levels of directness. Participants
were either given implicit instructions which focused on discrimination in general, explicit
instruction that specifically addressed discrimination based on accent, or no instructions which
was used as a control condition. While the content of the instruction documents was slightly
varied in terms of content, researchers ensured that the document design was kept constant to
limit possible confounding variables, as seen in Appendix A. This Intervention design was
developed through a pre-test. After being exposed to one of the intervention conditions,
participants were asked to listen to one of two audio fragments from a marketing lecture. This
stimulus material was created and used by Hendriks et al (2016). A verbal guise technique was
used in the creation of the audio fragments, whereby the same text (see Appendix B) was
presented by different speakers with either a moderate or slight Dutch accent. Participants were
then asked to evaluate the assigned audio fragment in an online questionnaire.


3.2 Subjects
In total 194 Dutch participants took part in the study. Over half of the participants were female
(54.1%), while 44.3% were male and 1.5% identified themselves as non-binary. The Chi-
squared tests for both the accent strength conditions and prejudice control groups were
insignificant (p>.810). The age of the participants ranged between 18-30 years (M=24.60,
SD=3.44). To test the distribution of age between both the accent strength and prejudice control
groups, an independent t-test (t (191.79) =.259, p =.796) and F-test (F (2, 191)=2.57,p=.079)
were conducted, showcasing an equal distribution across all conditions. In terms of education
level, 125 (64.4%) participants were currently attending or had completed an HBO education
level whereas 69 (35.6%) subjects were enrolled in a WO programme. Again a Chi-squared
test was conducted for both the accent conditions (χ2(1)=.53,p=.465) and prejudice control
conditions (χ2(2)=.30, p=.862), demonstrating an equal distribution among all groups.
Participants were also asked to indicate their perceived English proficiency on a 7-point
Likert scale (M= 6.01, SD= .77) based on Krishna & Alhuwalia (2008). For both accentedness
(χ2(2)=1.99, p=.369) and Prejudice control (χ2(4)=1.16, p=.884), self-evaluated proficiency

, was found to be distributed equally. Simultaneously, participants were asked to take the
LexTALE test (Lemhöfer & Broersma, 2012; www.lextale.com) to evaluate the actual English
proficiency of subjects. Again, the independent t-test results yielded insignificant results for
both the accent conditions (p=.184) and prejudice control condition (p=.500). To control for
possible pre-existing attitude prejudice, participants were asked to indicate to what extent they
agree to several statements on a scale from 1-to-7, based on Ura et al. (2015). The results
indicated no significant differences for both independent variables between the groups in terms
of attitude prejudice (Accent strength: t(190.14)=1.41, p=.159; Prejudice control: F(2,
191)=.53, p=.590).
Another background variable that was determined was the participant's familiarity with
the Dutch language. Hereby participants had to indicate to what extent they agree with three
different statements on a scale from 1-to-7, based on Hendriks et al. (2021). Again, Dutch
language familiarity seemed to be distributed equally among the different conditions for each
variable (Accent strength: t(190.44)=1.03,p=.305; Prejudice control: (F(2,191)=.75,p=.476).
Additionally, participants were asked to indicate whether they have work experience and hiring
experience. In terms of work experience, it was shown that the majority of participants (84.5%)
had between 1 to 15 years of working experience while 30 participants (15.5%) had no working
experience. Nevertheless, work experience was shown to be equally distributed among accent
strength conditions (t(190.53)=.18, p=.093) and prejudice control groups (F(2,191)=.13,
p=.879). Regarding hiring experiences, the descriptive analysis revealed that 81.4% of subjects
never worked as part of a hiring panel in contrast to 18.6% of participants who had previous
experience. Lastly, participants were asked to indicate the main language(s) of their study
programme (Hendriks et al., 2021). Hereby it was shown that most students followed a study
programme in English (95.5%) and/or Dutch (93.8%), whereas only 51 students (26.3%)
followed a study programme conducted in another language (German, French, Russian).
Nevertheless, an independent t-test demonstrated that the language of the programme was
equally distributed across all accent strength groups (p=.730) while an F-test indicated similar
results for the prejudice control groups (p=.178).


3.3 Design
The study employed a 3 (Prejudice control measure: Implicit, Explicit, No Control) x 2 (Non-
native accent strength: slight, moderate) between-subject design, giving 6 possible conditions
overall.

The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.

Quick and easy check-out

Quick and easy check-out

You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.

Focus on what matters

Focus on what matters

Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!

Frequently asked questions

What do I get when I buy this document?

You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.

Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?

Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.

Who am I buying these notes from?

Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller smiley00. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.

Will I be stuck with a subscription?

No, you only buy these notes for $7.03. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.

Can Stuvia be trusted?

4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)

79373 documents were sold in the last 30 days

Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy study notes for 14 years now

Start selling
$7.03
  • (0)
  Add to cart