Click on the following links. Please note these will open in a new window.

Journal Article 1: Jiang, L., & Probst, T. M. (2016). The moderating effect of trust in management on the consequences of job insecurity. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 1–25. doi:10.1177/0143831X16652945

Learning Objectives: 12-2: Rationale for conducting factorial designs. | 12-3: How to hypothesize and interpret main effects and interaction effects.

Summary: This is a correlational factorial design examining the relationship between job insecurity, trust in management, and employee attitudes and well-being.

Questions to Consider:

1. What is the rationale for conducting this factorial design?
2. Which of the hypotheses predicted main effects, and which predicted interaction effects?
3. How would you interpret the interactions depicted in Figures 2, 3, and 4?

Journal Article 2: Lens, K. M. E., van Doorn, J., Pemberton, A., Lahlah, E., & Bogaerts, S. (2017). One rule for the goose, one for the gander? Wrongfulness and harmfulness in determining reactions to offenders and victims of crime. European Journal of Criminology, 14, 183–199. doi:10.1177/1477370816649623

Learning Objectives: 12-2: Rationale for conducting factorial designs. | 12-3: How to hypothesize and interpret main effects and interaction effects.

Summary: This is a 2 X 2 experimental factorial examining the effect of crime severity and experienced harm on perceptions of a crime victim and offender.

Questions to Consider:

1. What is the rationale for conducting this factorial design?
2. Which of the interactions were statistically significant?
3. What would a graph of the statistically significant interactions look like? (hint: mean scores are presented in tables); How would you interpret these interactions?

Journal Article 3: Kwon, K., & Lease, A. M. (2009). Children’s social identification with a friendship group: A moderating effect on intent to conform to norms. Small Group Research, 40, 694–719. doi:10.1177/1046496409346578

Learning Objective: 12-3: How to hypothesize and interpret main effects and interaction effects.

Summary: This is a correlational factorial design examining the relationship between social identification, group norms, and intention to conform to the group norms.

Questions to Consider:

1. Which of the three hypotheses represents an interaction hypothesis? What would a graph of this hypothesized interaction look like?
2. Did the results support the hypothesized interaction? Explain.
3. What were the results of the 3 X 2 ANOVAs reported in the section “Descriptive Characteristics of Self-Reported Friendship Group” on pages 704–705 of the article?