|
楼主 |
发表于 2008-3-3 18:29:06
|
显示全部楼层
| Q1
| Q2
| Q3
| Q4
| Q5
| Q6
| Q7
| Q8
| P1
| 5
| 7
| 4
| 1
| 4
| 5
| 2
| 3
| P2
| 6
| 7
| 5
| 1
| 2
| 3
| 2
| 3
| P3
| 5
| 7
| 3
| 2
| 4
| 4
| 3
| 2
| P4
| 4
| 7
| 3
| 2
| 4
| 4
| 1
| 4
| P5
| 5
| 7
| 3
| 1
| 4
| 4
| 1
| 3
| P6
| 6
| 7
| 3
| 2
| 4
| 3
| 2
| 3
| P7
| 4
| 7
| 7
| 1
| 2
| 2
| 1
| 3
| P8
| 6
| 7
| 4
| 4
| 5
| 5
| 3
| 2
| P9
| 6
| 7
| 4
| 4
| 6
| 3
| 1
| 4
| P10
| 5
| 7
| 3
| 1
| 4
| 4
| 1
| 3
| My Own
| 4
| 7
| 3
| 2
| 4
| 4
| 2
| 3
|
Average judgement for positive actor outcome (questions 1, 3, 5, 7): 3.64
Average judgement for negative actor outcome (questions 2, 4, 6, 8): 3.91
Effect of “actor outcome” on subjects’ judgements: 0.27
Average judgement for positive actor intention (questions 1, 2, 5, 6): 4.93
Average judgement for negative actor intention (questions 3, 4, 7, 8): 2.62
Effect of “actor intention” on subjects’ judgements: 2.31
Average judgement for positive recipient outcome (questions 1, 2, 3,4): 4.46
Average judgement for negative recipient outcome (questions 5, 6, 7,8): 3.09
Effect of “recipient outcome” on subjects’ judgements: 1.37
From the results it appears that the effect of the actor’s intention on subjects’ judgement was greatest. This implies that it is the actor’s intention that influences people’s decisions not the actor’s outcome or recipient outcome. Positive actor intention had the highest average rating from subjects and negative actor intention had the lowest average rating from subjects. In terms of altruism, the data agrees with the concept of helping others even if it involves costs to the helper. The only scene where everyone agreed on their ratings is scene number 2 where the positive intention of the actor led to a positive recipient outcome but a negative actor outcome.
In terms of aggression, the data also agrees with the definition of intentional behaviour aimed at causing either physical damage or psychological pain at another person. The scenes with negative actor intentions led to the lowest ratings in the data. |
|