Robert D. Ridge

When God Sanctions Killing Effect of Scriptural Violence on Aggression

Violent people often claim that God sanctions their actions. In two studies, participants read a violent passage said to come from either the Bible or an ancient scroll. For half the participants, the passage said that God sanctioned the violence. Next, participants competed with an ostensible partner on a task in which the winner could blast the loser with loud noise through headphones (the aggression measure). Study 1 involved Brigham Young University students; 99% believed in God and in the Bible. Study 2 involved Vrije Universiteit–Amsterdam students; 50% believed in God, and 27% believed in the Bible. In Study 1, aggression increased when the passage was from the Bible or mentioned God. In Study 2, aggression increased when the passage mentioned God, especially among participants who believed in God and in the Bible. These results suggest that scriptural violence sanctioned by God can increase aggression, especially in believers.

When God Sanctions Killing

Violent people often claim that God sanctions their actions. In two studies, participants read a violent passage said to come from either the Bible or an ancient scroll. For half the participants, the passage said that God sanctioned the violence. Next, participants competed with an ostensible partner on a task in which the winner could blast the loser with loud noise through headphones (the aggression measure). Study 1 involved Brigham Young University students; 99% believed in God and in the Bible. Study 2 involved Vrije Universiteit–Amsterdam students; 50% believed in God, and 27% believed in the Bible. In Study 1, aggression increased when the passage was from the Bible or mentioned God. In Study 2, aggression increased when the passage mentioned God, especially among participants who believed in God and in the Bible. These results suggest that scriptural violence sanctioned by God can increase aggression, especially in believers.

Backbiting and bloodshed in books: Short-term effects of reading physical and relational aggression in literature

The current research consisted of two studies examining the effects of reading physical and relational aggression in literature. In both studies, participants read one of two stories (containing physical or relational aggression), and then participated in one of two tasks to measure aggression. In Study 1, participants who read the physical aggression story were subsequently more physically aggressive than those who read the relational aggression story. Conversely, in Study 2, participants who read the relational aggression story were subsequently more relationally aggressive than those who read the physical aggression story. Combined, these results show evidence for specific effects of reading aggressive content in literature.

I think she's attracted to me: The effect of men's beliefs on women's behavior in a job interview scenario

This study investigated how an attraction belief affected both a mans treatment of a woman and her responses to his treatment in an environment governed by professional norms (i.e., in a job interview scenario). Sixty male undergraduates interviewed 60 female undergraduates to assess their suitability for a teaching assistant position. A randomly selected half of the interviewers were led to believe that the woman (i.e., the applicant) was attracted to them, whereas the other half were led to believe that she was not attracted to them. Consistent with research on behavioral confirmation, interviewers elicited significantly more flirtatious behavior from applicants in the attraction belief condition than in the no-attraction belief condition. Applicants did not perceive any differences in their flirtatious behavior, suggesting an unwitting participation in the sequence of behavioral confirmation. Implications of these results for understanding the initiation of potentially sexually harassing behavior are discussed.

Guys like us: The link between sexual harassment proclivity and blame:

The present study investigated whether or not a man’s proclivity to engage in sexual harassment impacts how he blames sexual harassers and their victims. One hundred nineteen male participants read hypothetical harassment scenarios and responded to Bartling and Eisenman’s (1993, Sexual harassment proclivities in men and women. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 31, 189–192) Sexual Harassment Proclivities scale. Results revealed that men high in the proclivity to harass blamed harassers less and victims more than did low-proclivity men. Furthermore, ratings of similarity of the perpetrator and relevance of the situation suggest that this differential pattern of blaming reflected a self-protective motivation proposed by Shaver’s (1970, Defensive attribution: Effects of severity and relevance on the responsibility assigned for an accident. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 14, 101-113) defensive attribution theory.

No Girls Allowed: Women in Male-Dominated Majors Experience Increased Gender Harassment and Bias:

The prevalence of gender harassment in male-dominated workforces has been well established, but little is known regarding the experiences of women in male-dominated majors within academia. The current study examines the experiences and gender-related biases of 146 male and female students in male-dominated (MD) and gender-equivalent (GE) majors. This study hypothesizes that men from MD majors, as opposed to GE majors, will exhibit more explicit and implicit bias regarding women in positions of power and authority, resulting in a higher prevalence of gender harassment towards women in MD majors. Results showed that there was no significant difference in self-reported explicit bias against women in positions of power and authority between men from MD and GE majors, but there was significantly more implicit bias among men from MD majors as opposed to GE majors. Additionally, women from MD majors experienced significantly more gender harassment than women from GE majors. Implications of these findings and suggestions to assist those working in education to combat these biases and instances of harassment are discussed.

Mixed messages, mixed outcomes: the effects of reconciliation and retaliation story endings on aggression

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the effects of reconciliation and retaliation story endings on subsequent aggressive affect and behavior. Design/methodology/approach Participants took part in two ostensibly unrelated studies. The first involved reading a violent story, attributed to a biblical or secular source, which ended in either brutal retaliation or peaceful reconciliation. They then took part in a second study in which they completed measures of aggressive affect and behavior. Findings Participants told that their stories came from a secular source experienced a more aggressive affect than those told that their stories came from a biblical source. In terms of behavioral aggression, a significant difference in effect of the story ending on males and females emerged. Females who read the reconciliation ending had lower levels of behavioral aggression than females who read the retaliation ending. Conversely, males who read the reconciliation ending had higher levels of behavioral aggression than males who read the retaliation ending. Research limitations/implications These findings suggest that media depictions of prosocial reactions to unprovoked aggression may not reduce aggression in men. Practical implications Results are discussed in terms of moral values espoused by women and men and suggest that anti-violence messages may be strengthened to the extent they address the values important to both. Originality/value This study extends research on violent media exposure to a burgeoning literature on reading violent content.

Perceptual and behavioral effects of expectations formed by exposure to positive or negative Ratemyprofessors.com evaluations

Abstract The Internet permits students to share course evaluations with millions of people, and recent research suggests that students who read these evaluations form expectations about instructors’ competence, attractiveness, and capability. The present study extended past research investigating these expectations by (1) exposing participants to actual Ratemyprofessors.com (RMP) evaluations, (2) presenting the evaluations on a computer screen to simulate real-world exposure, and (3) assessing the effects of the evaluations on standard outcomes from the pedagogy literature. Results of Study 1 revealed that participants exposed to a positive evaluation rated an instructor as more pedagogically skilled, personally favorable, and a better lecturer than participants who read a negative evaluation. Study 2 replicated these findings and found that participants who read a positive evaluation reported being more engaged in the lecture and scored higher on an unexpected quiz taken one week later than those who read a negative evaluation. Engagement, however, did not mediate the relationship between evaluations and performance. Given these results, instructors might consider reviewing their RMP ratings to anticipate the likely expectations of incoming students and to prepare accordingly. However, research that further enhances the realism of this study is needed before specific recommendations for corrective action can be suggested.