Satisfaction Guarantee

First time here?

usewelcome15 to get 15% off

The fundamental Attribution Error In detecting : The Boy who cried Wold Effect

O’Sullivan, M. (2003). The fundamental attribution error in detecting deception: the boy-who-cried-wolf effect. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin 29(10), 1316. Questions What was the rationale for the current research (the answer to this should often include previous literature or theory)? What is the current hypothesis (or hypotheses if there are more than 1)? How many participants were in the study? Describe the group of participants (gender, age, race, religion). Describe the procedure. In other words, what happened to the participants from the time they began the study until the time it ended. Make sure to include any measures (surveys or questionnaires) and/or materials (technology or props). Did the data support or fail to support the hypothesis (or hypotheses)? This answer should be in plain English. You should not be using numbers (statistics) in your answer. What are the implications of this research? In other words, how does this work affect everyday people, theory formation, interpretation of current events etc.. Make sure to describe the social psychological phenomenon, principles, theories, and/or concepts being examined within the article. You can reference your textbook within this answer to tie in some of the concepts we’ve learned, just make sure to use APA guidelines for citation when doing so. What were the limitations of the current study? You do not need to use the limitations given by the author(s) of the study. You can feel free to rely on what we’ve learned about research methods and ethics to suggest your own. Just be sure to keep an academic tone throughout your writing. If there were multiple studies within your article, you should also answer the following questions: What is the rationale for completing the additional study? What is the hypothesis for the additional study? How is the method different in this study from study 1? What are the conclusions from this additional study? How do these conclusions build upon those from study 1?