Proving the Validity of the ARJ Scale - Case Study Example

The Tendency to Act to Restore Justice; Proving the Validity of the Scale Name: (first name, middle initial(s), and last name) Course Lecturer Institution Name Date Hypothesis 1: ARJ will be positively related to vengeance-seeking. Justification The ARJ (Act to Restore Justice scale) seeks to measure the extent to which one will act to restore justice in situations which they determine that justice has not been met (Strelan, 2012). This will be positively related to vengeance seeking which is in turn directly proportional to anger and inversely proportional to empathy. An individual who is vengeful in nature is more likely to act towards the restoration of justice as this is a mode of vengeance. A lack of empathy leads to acting to restore justice, disregarding empathy which would call for mercy, which upon failure results in feelings of anger, which eventually leads to alternative vengeance-seeking (Goranson & Stuckless, 1992). The ARJ will therefore be positively related to vengeance-seeking. Research hypothesis If the measure obtained from the ARJ is compared with the measure of the vengeance-seeking scale, then there will be a positive correlation between the two variables. Analysis Figure 1: figure showing the correlation between ARJ and vengeance Interpretation and discussion Figure 1 shows a scatter plot comparing vengeance and ARJ. Pearson’s r value for the correlation of the two above variables is 0.214621- this shows a weak positive correlation between the ARJ and vengeance. These results support the hypothesis as there is a positive correlation between the two variables. Since the ARJ and vengeance had much in common, there was a positive correlation between the two variables when plotted on the scatter plot. Since it was posited that the ARJ and vengeance have much in common, and would consequently have a positive correlation, the results therefore support the hypothesis. The positive relationship between the two variables shows convergent validity of the ARJ. This proves that the ARJ is a valid scale and actually measures the tendency of individuals to act to restore justice in actual situations (Goranson & Stuckless, 1992; Pelham and Blanton, 2012; Strelan, 2012). Hypothesis 2: ARJ will be unrelated to, or have a very weak relationship with, agreeableness. Justification Since the ARJ is justice-seeking, and acts towards the restoration of the same, its relationship with agreeableness will be weak or nil. Agreeableness is the quality of being pleasing or suitable. People with the personality trait of agreeableness tend to be less confrontational and more conforming to their environments. Because agreeableness is ingrained in them, and is part of who they are, it plays a considerable role in the decisions that they make. The tendency to seek justice requires that the individual be more willing than the average person to participate in confrontation. Since the agreeable individuals are less willing than the average person to participate in confrontational situations, it follows that they would also have a lower tendency to act towards the restoration of justice all factors held constant (Jensen-Campbell, Knack, and Gomez, 2010). While they would score highly on the agreeableness scale, an individual with the Agreeable Trait would be more likely to score lowly on the ARJ. There would therefore be little or no relation between the ARJ and agreeableness (Strelan, 2012). Research hypothesis If the measure obtained from the ARJ is correlated with that of the Agreeableness scale, there will a weak or no correlation between the two variables. Analysis Figure 2: figure showing the correlation between ARJ and Agreeableness Interpretation and discussion Figure 2 shows a scatter plot comparing ARJ and agreeableness. Pearson’s r value for the two variables above is -0.11441. This means that when plotted against agreeableness, the ARJ showed a weak negative correlation with the agreeableness variable. Since the ARJ and the agreeableness counter each other as they measure opposing variables, they showed a negative correlation when plotted in a scatter plot. It was expected that if the ARJ and agreeableness have a weak or no correlation, then the ARJ is indeed measuring what it is intended to measure. The resultant scatter plot obtained showed discriminant validity as expected. The results therefore support the hypothesis that if the measure obtained from the ARJ is compared with that of the Agreeableness scale, then the measure will have a weak or no correlation. This further proves that the ARJ is a valid measure (Strelan, 2012; Jensen-Campbell, Knack, and Gomez, 2010; Pelham and Blanton, 2012). Hypothesis 3: ARJ will be positively associated with self-reported justice-restoring behaviors on behalf of the self Justification The ARJ being a scale that measures the tendency of individuals to act towards ensuring that justice prevails in any given situation should be able to enable the prediction of how people behave in scenarios requiring action toward the restoration of justice. Because the ARJ measures the tendency to “do”, then we expect that the individuals who score highly on the ARJ do indeed “do” things to ensure that justice is restored. Thus the premise is that the ARJ is predictive of one’s behavior regarding the restoration of justice in any given situation (Goldberg et al, 2006). When individuals are asked to self-report on their justice-restoring behavior, their report should correlate with the ARJ in the predicted direction. It is expected that this hypothesis will have predictive validity when tested. If the two variables show a positive correlation on the scatter plot, then the hypothesis is supported (Strelan, 2012; Lerner, 2003). Research hypothesis If the ARJ is compared with self-reported behaviors to restore justice on behalf of the self, there will be a positive correlation between the two variables. Analysis Figure 3: figure showing the correlation between ARJ and self-reported justice-restoring behaviors on behalf of the self Interpretation and discussion Figure 3 shows a scatter plot comparing the ARJ and self-reported justice-restoring behaviors on behalf of the self. Pearson’s r value for the correlation of the two variables is 0.279514. This shows a weak but positive correlation between the two variables. The ARJ shows a positive correlation with self-reported behaviors to restore justice on behalf of the self on the scatter plot. The positive correlation shown in the figure is in tandem with the expected results. This proves that the ARJ successfully predicts the behavior of individuals as appertains to acting toward restoring justice. The results show predictive validity of the ARJ and thus also support the hypothesis. The ARJ is thus proven to be a valid measure (Strelan, 2012; Pelham and Blanton, 2012). Hypothesis 4: ARJ will be positively associated with self-reported justice-restoring behaviors on behalf of others. Justification The ARJ measures the tendency of people to act toward restoring justice in any given situation. It should therefore measure the tendency of people to act toward the restoration of justice on behalf of others. When individuals are asked to self-report on their behaviors regarding their tendency to act toward restoring justice on behalf of others, their reports should correlate with the ARJ positively. It is expected that this hypothesis will have predictive validity when tested. If the two variables show a positive correlation on the scatter plot, then the hypothesis is supported (Schmitt et al, 2010; Strelan, 2012) Research hypothesis If the ARJ is compared with self-reported behaviors to restore justice on the behalf of others, then there will be a positive correlation between the two variables. Analysis Figure 4: figure showing the correlation between ARJ and self-reported justice-restoring behaviors on behalf of others. Interpretation and discussion From the scatter plot above, Pearson’s r= 0.038783, which when rounded off to the nearest first decimal place becomes 0. According to this figure, when compared, the ARJ showed no meaningful correlation with self-reported behaviors to restore justice on behalf of others. Since the results are as expected, they support the hypothesis. This correlation therefore shows no predictive validity of the ARJ. The ARJ claims to measure the tendency of people to act toward restoration of justice in any given situation, but was not able to predict people’s behavior in actual situations. This was proven by the self-report of the individuals. The lack of correlation means that whether or not people scored highly on the ARJ, this score had no bearing on their self-reported behaviors to tend to act to restore justice, in this case, on the behalf of others. The lack of correlation may be owed in part to the fact that people tend to view themselves differently than they really are. Thus if they think themselves bold, for example, they hardly ever act that way. The results show no predictive validity of the ARJ, and moreover, do not support the hypothesis that ARJ will be positively associated with self-reported justice-restoring behaviors on behalf of others. This discredits the ARJ as a valid measure (Strelan, 2012; Pelham and Blanton, 2012). Hypothesis 5: ARJ will be positively associated with willingness to act to restore justice in a hypothetical situation. Justification The ARJ measures the tendency of people to act toward restoring justice. It should therefore be positively related with willingness to act to restore justice in a hypothetical situation. If an individual scores highly on the ARJ, it is expected that they will be more willing to restore justice in the situation. Conversely, if the individual scores poorly on the ARJ, then it is expected that they will be less willing to act to restore justice in the given situation. This is the scenario anticipated if the two variables are positively related. A positive correlation will support the hypothesis (Schmitt, 1996; Strelan, 2012; Lerner, 2003). Research hypothesis If the ARJ is compared to the willingness to act to restore justice in a hypothetical situation, then there will be a positive correlation between the two variables. Analysis Figure 5: figure showing a correlation between ARJ and willingness to act to restore justice in a hypothetical situation. Interpretation and discussion Figure 5 shows a scatter plot comparing the ARJ to the willingness to act to restore justice in a hypothetical situation. The Pearson correlation coefficient (r) is 0.375988. This therefore suggests that there is a weak positive correlation between the two variables. This means that the ARJ is positively related to the willingness to act to restore justice in a hypothetical situation, which means that the hypothesis is supported. Since the results are as expected, the ARJ is found to have predictive validity. The ARJ is therefore a valid measure for individual tendencies to act toward the restoration of justice (Strelan, 2012; Pelham and Blanton, 2012). References Darley, J. and Pittman, T. (2003). The psychology of compensatory and retributive justice. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7 (4), pp. 324--336. Goldberg, L. R., Johnson, J. A., Eber, H. W., Hogan, R., Ashton, M. C., Cloninger, C. R., & Gough, H. C. (2006). The International Personality Item Pool and the future of public-domain personality measures. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 84-96 Goranson, R. & Stuckless, N. (1992). The Vengeance Scale: Development of a Measure of Attitudes Toward Revenge, Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 7:1 p.25 Jensen-Campbell, L., Knack, J. and Gomez, H. (2010). The psychology of nice people. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 4 (11), pp. 1042--1056. Lerner, M. (2003). The justice motive: Where social psychologists found it, how they lost it, and why they may not find it again. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7 (4), pp. 388--399. Pelham, B. and Blanton, H. (2012). Conducting research in psychology. Chapter 10. Belmont, CA: Thomson/Wadsworth. Schmitt, M. (1996). Individual differences in sensitivity to befallen injustice (SBI). Personality and Individual Differences, 21 (1), pp. 3--20. Schmitt, M., Baumert, A., Gollwitzer, M. and Maes, J. (2010). The Justice Sensitivity Inventory: Factorial validity, location in the personality facet space, demographic pattern, and normative data. Social Justice Research, 23 (2-3), pp. 211--238. Strelan, P. (2012). The Act to Restore Justice Scale. Unpublished scale. Read More

Research hypothesis If the measure obtained from the ARJ is correlated with that of the Agreeableness scale, there will a weak or no correlation between the two variables. Analysis Figure 2: figure showing the correlation between ARJ and Agreeableness Interpretation and discussion Figure 2 shows a scatter plot comparing ARJ and agreeableness. Pearson’s r value for the two variables above is -0.11441. This means that when plotted against agreeableness, the ARJ showed a weak negative correlation with the agreeableness variable.

Since the ARJ and the agreeableness counter each other as they measure opposing variables, they showed a negative correlation when plotted in a scatter plot. It was expected that if the ARJ and agreeableness have a weak or no correlation, then the ARJ is indeed measuring what it is intended to measure. The resultant scatter plot obtained showed discriminant validity as expected. The results therefore support the hypothesis that if the measure obtained from the ARJ is compared with that of the Agreeableness scale, then the measure will have a weak or no correlation.

This further proves that the ARJ is a valid measure (Strelan, 2012; Jensen-Campbell, Knack, and Gomez, 2010; Pelham and Blanton, 2012). Hypothesis 3: ARJ will be positively associated with self-reported justice-restoring behaviors on behalf of the self Justification The ARJ being a scale that measures the tendency of individuals to act towards ensuring that justice prevails in any given situation should be able to enable the prediction of how people behave in scenarios requiring action toward the restoration of justice.

Because the ARJ measures the tendency to “do”, then we expect that the individuals who score highly on the ARJ do indeed “do” things to ensure that justice is restored. Thus the premise is that the ARJ is predictive of one’s behavior regarding the restoration of justice in any given situation (Goldberg et al, 2006). When individuals are asked to self-report on their justice-restoring behavior, their report should correlate with the ARJ in the predicted direction. It is expected that this hypothesis will have predictive validity when tested.

If the two variables show a positive correlation on the scatter plot, then the hypothesis is supported (Strelan, 2012; Lerner, 2003). Research hypothesis If the ARJ is compared with self-reported behaviors to restore justice on behalf of the self, there will be a positive correlation between the two variables. Analysis Figure 3: figure showing the correlation between ARJ and self-reported justice-restoring behaviors on behalf of the self Interpretation and discussion Figure 3 shows a scatter plot comparing the ARJ and self-reported justice-restoring behaviors on behalf of the self.

Pearson’s r value for the correlation of the two variables is 0.279514. This shows a weak but positive correlation between the two variables. The ARJ shows a positive correlation with self-reported behaviors to restore justice on behalf of the self on the scatter plot. The positive correlation shown in the figure is in tandem with the expected results. This proves that the ARJ successfully predicts the behavior of individuals as appertains to acting toward restoring justice. The results show predictive validity of the ARJ and thus also support the hypothesis.

The ARJ is thus proven to be a valid measure (Strelan, 2012; Pelham and Blanton, 2012). Hypothesis 4: ARJ will be positively associated with self-reported justice-restoring behaviors on behalf of others. Justification The ARJ measures the tendency of people to act toward restoring justice in any given situation. It should therefore measure the tendency of people to act toward the restoration of justice on behalf of others. When individuals are asked to self-report on their behaviors regarding their tendency to act toward restoring justice on behalf of others, their reports should correlate with the ARJ positively.

It is expected that this hypothesis will have predictive validity when tested.

Read More