| − | H-speaking adults residing inside the United states completed the current survey as a task on Mturk in exchange for 0.50 compensation. Of those, 214 participants (ncleanliness = 111, nneutral = 103; mean age = 35 years; 55 female; 72 white) were retained within the analysis soon after planned exclusion (see beneath) on account of guessing with the study hypothesis or IER around the moral judgment items. The sample size consideration was primarily based on JCD's energy evaluation (i.e., 208 men and women just after planned exclusion).ProcedureThe major replication survey followed the process of SBH's Experiment 1 obtained from JCD. Upon giving an internet consent to participate, every single respondent had an hour to finish the Mturk study. Participants performed a 40-item sentence unscrambling activity, evaluated six moral judgment vignettes, and rated their emotional states. Similar to the procedure in JCD, participants also responded to an exploratory measure on private body consciousness (PBC; Miller et al., 1981). Right after the primary survey, respondents also filled out the exact same quality screening things made use of in JCD, at the same time as an extra scale for IER (see Measures section below). Lastly, they filled out a number of demographic products. The typical survey completion time was about 15 min, reflecting an typical hourly pay rate of two . Participants were randomly assigned into the neutral vs. cleanliness circumstances, which differed only around the sentence unscrambling tasks they completed (neutral words vs. cleanliness-related words). On the sentence unscrambling job, participants in both situations had been instructed, in capital letters, to "work quickly" and to "underline words as outlined by your 1st impression." Three exceptions differentiated the existing study from SBH and JCD. Initial, the study was conducted online as an alternative to using paper-and-pencil in individual sessions in a laboratory. Second, within the sentence unscrambling activity, participants checked boxes underneath probable words as opposed to underlining them on paper. Lastly, the survey was implemented on various webpages, which prevented respondents from going back to a earlier web page.Measuresrunaway trolley to kill a workman alternatively five other people; (c) "wallet," maintaining the cash from a lost wallet located in the street; (d) "plane," killing and eating an injured survivor of a plane crash to prevent starvation; (e) "r um?" falsifying one's resume to seek out employment; and (f) "kitten," making use of one's kitten for sexual arousal. Immediately after reading every single vignette, respondents rated their moral judgments on a 10-point scale ranged from 0 (perfectly ok) to 9 (particularly wrong). A moral judgment composite was designed by averaging the ratings across these six vignettes, Cronbach's = 0.59. The internal consistency reliability for the composite measure was low but comparable towards the values calculated from SBH's and JCD's Study 1 information (Cronbach's = 0.66 and 0.48, respectively). SBH incorporated nine emotional states to rule out any effect from the manipulation on emotions. The exact same items (relaxed, angry, pleased, sad, afraid, depressed, disgusted, upset, and confused) had been utilised within this study. The participants clicked on visual analog scales to indicate their emotional states, which had been automatically scored from 0 to one hundred. JCD included a private body conscientiousness scale as a prospective moderator in the cleanliness priming's impact.
| + | |
