A new set of studies on mindfulness and selfishness provides an opportunity to practice skills related to factorial designs (Chapter 12). Let's get started.
Here's the theoretical background of the study, as described by a BBC journalist. He explains that mindfulness can
sharpen our concentration, extend our working memory and boost our mental flexibility. With practice, we should become less emotionally reactive – allowing us to deal with our problems more calmly.
One ‘benefit’ that you might not expect to gain, however, is heightened egotism. Yet a recent study suggests that, in some contexts, practicing mindfulness really can exaggerate some people’s selfish tendencies. With their increased inward focus, they seem to forget about others, and are less willing to help those in need.
The journalist then describes two studies run by psychologist Michael Poulin. The first compared the effects of a mindfulness meditation session among people from two different cultures. Notice the term "depends" in this description, which is a signal that the study was investigating an interaction. The pair of studies comes....
from Michael Poulin, an associate professor in psychology at the State University of New York at Buffalo, who wanted to investigate whether the effects of mindfulness might depend on its cultural context and the existing values of the people who are practicing it.
He was particularly interested in the ways people think about themselves – their “self-construal”. Some people take a more independent viewpoint, focused on personal characteristics. If they are asked to describe themselves, they might emphasise their intelligence or their sense of humour. People with an interdependent view, on the other hand, tend to think of themselves in terms of their relations to others.
Read this description of the study, and identify the first independent variable (IV, or factor), the second IV (factor), and the dependent variable:
... Poulin invited 366 college students into the lab and first gave them a questionnaire measuring their independence or interdependence.
Half were then asked to perform a meditation focused on the sensation of breathing. The control group were given a “sham” meditation that involved sitting and letting their mind wander for 15 minutes. The exercise may have been relaxing, but it wasn’t designed to increase their mindfulness.
Next came a test of pro-social behaviour, in which the students were told about a new project to help fund a charity for the homeless. They were then given the opportunity to stuff envelopes ...which would be sent to the university’s alumni – but they were told there was no obligation to do so, if they wished to leave early.
Now for the results:
Sure enough, Poulin found that the effects of the meditation depended on people’s existing attitudes. If they were already interdependent, then the people who took the mindfulness exercise were willing to spend much more time on the charitable task; overall, they stuffed about 17% more envelopes than the control group. If they were independent-minded, however, the exact opposite occurred – the mindfulness had made them even more self-centered, so they were less willing to help the homeless. Overall, they stuffed around 15% fewer envelopes than the control group.
Questions about Study 1:
a) What was the study's first factor (Hint: It was an IV)? Was it independent groups or within groups?
b) What was the second factor? (hint: it was a participant variable, or PV). Was it independent groups or within groups?
c) What was the DV?
d) State the design of this study using this template: "__x__ , [independent-groups/within-groups/mixed] factorial"
e) Sketch a bar or line graph of the results, as described in the paragraph above. use Figures 12.16 and 12.17 as models. Do you see an interaction here?
Now here is a second study, as described by the same journalist:
To be sure the finding was robust, Poulin’s team conducted a second experiment, in which the participants were first given a short text written either in the first-person singular (I), or first-person plural (we). As they read the text, they had to click on all the pronouns – a simple task known to prime either independent or interdependent thinking. They then completed the meditation tasks and, to test their pro-sociality, were asked whether they wanted to devote time to chat online with potential donors for the homelessness charity.
Once again, the mindfulness exercise exaggerated the effects of their self-perception, driving increased altruism among the interdependent-minded, and decreased altruism among the more independent-minded.
Questions about Study 2:
f) What was Study 2's first factor (Hint: It was an IV)? Was this one independent groups or within groups?
g) What was the second factor? (This was also an IV). Was it independent groups or within groups?
h) What was the DV in this study?
i) State the design of this study using this template: "__x__ , [independent-groups/within-groups/mixed] factorial"
j) Sketch a bar or line graph of the results, as described in the paragraph above. use Figure 12.11 as a model. Do you see an interaction? (You should, because this study was described with the phrase, "it depends"!)
k) There's causal language in the journalist's summary (e.g., " the mindfulness exercise ...was driving increased altruism" and " the mindfulness had made them even more self-centered" Is causal language warranted here? How come?
Note:Poulin's study has been peer reviewed and will be appearing in the journal Psychological Science, in the future. You can read an early version of the paper here.
