Emotional Response to Disgust - Essay Example

?Summary: The research piece in question introduces the reader to the understanding that the emotional response of disgust, especially with respect to religious and spiritual purity are in fact psychologically manufactured defense mechanisms that help an individual believer to recoil from potentially contaminating or “dangerous” religious beliefs that might challenge them outside their zone of comfort. In such a way, the element of disgust serves as a symbolically restorative spiritual process through which an individual regards a new way of thinking, forms a disgusted response, and hearkens back to their previously held belief system. In such a manner, the research is predicated upon measurement of disgust within a control and a test group; asked to copy different texts and measured based upon the levels of disgust that were represented. In seeking to set up such a measurement and draw inference from the results, the piece is able to help the reader to gain a more informed level of understanding with respect to the way in which disgust serves as a fundamentally motivation for helping to define and differentiate religious worldviews and methodology of acceptance/rejection. The ultimate outcome denotes the fact that individuals of the Christian persuasion are disgusted at a much higher level when they are asked to copy passages from an atheist’s book or from the Koran as compared to copying a “religiously neutral text” or a passage from the Bible. Introduction: Ultimately, the introduction of this particular piece is quite strong due to the fact that it allows the reader to come to a firm understanding of the research problem, the hypothesis, the study aims, and the expectation of results that the researchers intend on gleaning. Whereas many different approaches by a litany of different psychologists have oftentimes strayed from representing a clear and concise understanding of these core compliments within their introduction, this particular piece represents these to their fullest extent and allows for the reader to appreciate and understand all compliment parts of the study which will take place within the intervening pages. A noted component that exists within the final portion of the introduction is the inclusion of the following hypothesis: “We predicted that physical cleansing would eliminate the gustatory disgust response by symbolically removing the moral impurity associated with the rejected beliefs” (Ritter & Preston, 2011). Moreover, the hypothesis consistently matches with the information put forward in the abstract and the desired measurement goals of the study itself. This strength helps to add to the overall level of coherence that the piece exhibits. Method: Although it is oftentimes the case that a methodology for a particular research is presented in convoluted and confusing manners, it must be stated that the method which is set forward with regards to this particular research question is surprisingly simple. However, it should not be understood that a simple method/approach should be understood as one that is fundamentally flawed or simplistic. In effect, the researchers have been able to find a useful and interesting research topic that has not experienced a great degree of research within the past; consequently, a surprisingly simplistic level of research can be focused upon this particular research question as a means of drawing a level of inference that few other scholars have thus far been able to question. Ultimately, even though it is possible that alternative method could be used, the efficiency of such an alternative method is something that is highly suspect. In effect, it is the belief of this particular author that the methodology that was utilized within the study was the most effective for the purpose of the measurement and design of the research question. Design: Whereas the preceding sections have been largely positive with regards to the effectiveness of the authors and the way in which the research is put forward, it must be understood that the design of the research itself leaves something to be desired. Whereas it is somewhat obvious that many of the variables that the authors are using are widely understood and engender a great many widely recognized terminologies, simply expecting the reader to integrate with these variables without further explanation and discussion is shortsighted and ineffective. For instance, one of the most obvious metrics is missing is that of an overall definition of religiosity. Without such a definition being referenced within the analysis, it is somewhat impossible for the reader to come to an informed estimation of the way in which this fundamental variable impact upon the hypothesis and the inference that is drawn throughout the piece. But alternative design would invent a leverage the same descriptive strength that was noted within the introduction as a means of providing an understanding and appreciation for the key terms that would be utilized within the research. Participants: With regards to the participants of these respective inquiries, it must be understood that all of the experiments it took place leveraged undergraduate students as the primary focus of the experiments. Although it is true that any sample size or demographic is prone to a level of bias, a fundamental shortcoming that this particular study evidences is with regards the fact that only undergraduate students were selected for analysis. Although this fact in and of itself does not help to reduce the overall effectiveness and means of inference that the study itself could denote, it most certainly reduces the level of inference that can be had with regards to individuals that are outside the demographic, or socioeconomic status that the typical undergraduate student might exhibit. In this manner, a fundamental shortcoming is not with regards to the sample size but the sample make up. Even though this does represent a fundamental shortcoming, it must be appreciated and understood that effecting a nonbiased sample and creating a series of experiments that could potentially lend a level of inference to broader society or other research in the current field. Materials: Virtually no discussion at all exists with regards to how the materials that were utilized within the specific study were selected. This in and of itself represents a fundamental oversight and does not help the reader/analyst to, way with informed level of understanding concerning the validity of the results that are presented. With regards the overall appropriateness of the resources, it must be understood that without a level of discussion and analysis with regards to how a selection process was determined, this specific question must remain unanswered. Further, although a level of references provided with regards to the reliability and validity of the instruments that are utilized, in terms of other studies that it formed, a thorough investigation and/or and inclusion of an appendix/appendices that could help to provide a further level of understanding with regards to these metrics is also notably missing from the material. A definitive strength that exist with regards to the material is with respect to the fact that replication of this information/data would likely easily be achieved utilizing alternative method. This is due to the fact that the scoring method is described in great depth and allows the reader to come to a rather firm understanding of the way in which these metrics were measured against one another and ultimately presented in terms of measurable statistics/data. Procedure: A key strength of the procedure is with respect to the fact that the authors illustrate that more than one interviewer was engaging with the test subjects; a safeguard that can ultimately have a great deal of benefit with respect to reducing bias. Moreover, even though the rating process itself was not aligned for double-blind, the independence of the reviewers and the method through which the samples were collected and categorized helps to encourage the reader/researcher that the procedure itself took a great pains to ensure that it was as unbiased as possible and its results. Moreover, an additional strength is with regards to the death of analysis and discussion that is represented with regards to the procedure itself. Far too many studies focused on the fact that the results themselves are telling and help to compound the hypothesis that was initially presented; rather than focusing upon a clear and concise discussion of the way in which the results were ultimately achieved. Through such an analysis and such a close level of inspection with regards to the procedure, the reader/researcher is encouraged with regards the overall veracity and reliability of the information. Results:  The results of the study are easy to interpret and do not leave a great deal of doubt in the mind of the researcher that the hypothesis that was originally stated corresponds to the information that is related. Through an analysis of a litany of other articles, this particular student has come to the appreciation of the fact that a clearly delineated and simplistically crafted results section speaks volumes with regards to the overall usefulness and appropriateness of a given research analysis. In fact, many lesser researchers have found themselves in a situation in which there hypothesis has been fundamentally flawed and they have had to shoehorn information that would otherwise not be useful in promoting the hypothesis in a complex and convoluted manner; something that the authors of this particular piece do not struggle with whatsoever. Discussion: Perhaps the greatest strength that this particular research analysis is able to present the reader is with regards to the fact that the subject matter at hand is not something that has been discussed, measured, and synthesize to an exhaustive level or degree. Far too many studies merely attempts to focus upon my new ship rather than engaging the reader with a more profound understanding of a research topic that has not been discussed to a great deal of death. However, the most notable shortcoming that is thus far been exhibited is with regards to the procedure itself and the means through which the material was selected. Even though it is true that the research study is effective in helping to engage the reader with a further level of understanding concerning the way in which discussed factors into an estimation of other faiths, the selection process through which these individuals were chosen, the relatively narrow demographic, the lack of socioeconomic differentiation, and the overall history with respect to the way in which the test information was decided upon helped to form the weaker aspects of this particular article; lending the reader to question the ultimately result which was presented as something that may very well not be indicative for a wider population. Reference Ritter, R. S., & Preston, J. (2011). Gross gods and icky atheism: Disgust responses to rejected religious beliefs. Journal Of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(6), 1225-1230. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2011.05.006 Read More