Forskning visar att människor ofta fyller i minnet utifrån sina erfarenheter och scheman. Vidare visar forskning att vittnen påverkar varandras minnen. Syftet med föreliggande studie var att undersöka om vittnen som enbart fick se effekter av ett brott drog slutsatser om att de sett brottet samt om sådana bakåtriktade slutsatsfel påverkas av diskussioner. Vidare undersöktes om deltagarnas Need for closure påverkade benägenheten att göra slutsatsfel. Fyrtioåtta deltagare presenterades för en film som visade effekten av ett brott. En vecka senare minnestestades deltagarna antingen efter att de diskuterat med ett medvittne eller inte. Resultatet visade inga effekter av medvittne för slutsatsfel. Vidare erhölls inget samband mellan Need for closure och felaktiga minnen. Begränsningar som deltagarnas goda förutsättningar vid tillfället för inkodning som skiljer sig från vid autentiska brott diskuteras vidare.

The abundance of forgiveness research has advanced scientific knowledge of the construct. Its multifaceted nature, however, has created specialization and domain-dependent research (e.g., close-relationship vs. non-relationship forgiveness). The current paper argues that a comprehensive framework that could be applied across domains is needed. The general principles perspective (Higgins, 1990, 1999), which identifies mechanisms that explain both chronic and situational variance, was used as a framework for forgiveness, specifically the mechanisms of accessibility and need for closure. Two studies tested the principles, a two-part study (N = 244 and 78, respectively) and an online survey (N = 214). The two-part study tested chronic accessibility for forgiveness (Accessibility Study One) within the context of the religiosity-forgiveness relationship (an area that has previously produced complex and contradictory results) and both the chronic and situational influence of need for closure (Need for Closure Study). The online survey was designed to test both situational and chronic accessibility (Accessibility Study Two) by priming half of the participants with religious words. Students from a large, Mid-Atlantic university participated. For accessibility, it was proposed that religious individuals would have higher chronic accessibility for forgiveness, because of the emphasis religions place on it; similarly, it was proposed that increasing accessibility for religiosity would increase situational accessibility for forgiveness. Results supported a weak, positive relationship between religiosity and chronic accessibility for forgiveness; however, increased accessibility did not relate to likelihood to forgive future transgressions. For situational accessibility, the religious prime did not successfully influence accessibility for religiosity; thus, situational accessibility could not be tested. For need for closure, it was proposed that forgiveness requires some comfort with uncertainty in order to engage in the process. Therefore, chronic need for closure was expected to negatively relate to likelihood to forgive future transgressions. Results replicated this previously found relationship. For situational need for closure, manipulated through perceived time limitations, it was proposed that it would interact with chronic forgiveness to predict likelihood to forgive, because as need for closure increases so too does automaticity. Forgiveness is arguably an automatic response for someone high in chronic forgiveness. Results did not support the interaction effect. In general, the project supported the chronic influence of the principles but did not support the situational. The limitations of the current project necessitate further inquiry for clarification, though some conclusions are suggested. Results suggest that motivations may be more influential than cognitions in forgiveness, that forgiveness research may require more highly contextualized models, and thus that the potential advantages of a comprehensive framework will require more sophisticated theoretical and empirical work. / Ph. D.

Master of Science / Department of Journalism and Mass Communications / Curtis Matthews / Integrated marketing communications strategies are being utilized more and more by practitioners who wish to reach their audiences in different ways at different times. However, the omnipresence that results from these multi-channel campaigns presents a new challenge for marketers, as their message and channel sequences may or may not be experienced in the order intended. Past literature has shown that both message order and channel sequence do matter. However, existing literature has not examined intended message sequences where the first channel “teases” the more comprehensive information available in the second channel. Therefore, the aim of this study was to bridge some of the gaps in past research by exploring message content order effects and channel sequence effects across intentional sequences for both high- and low-involvement product categories through the lens of the Elaboration Likelihood Model. A 2 (message content order: tease-to-answer versus answer-to-tease) by 2 (medium sequence: print-to-online versus online-to-print) by 2 (product involvement: high- versus low-involvement) mixed factorial experimental design was conducted to explore how message content order, channel sequence, and product involvement level affected evaluations of brand and message, as well as perceived behavioral intent. The findings indicated that message content order had significant influence over brand and message evaluation, with the tease-to-answer order producing the highest evaluations of brand and message. The findings also indicated that the online-to-print sequence was only effective for increasing behavioral intent under high-involvement conditions. Implications for marketing practitioners and future research are discussed.

Spirituality and religiosity can play key roles in individual lives through influencing health, social relationships, political views, as well as many other facets (Newberg, D'Aquili & Rause, 2001; Milevsky & Levitt, 2004; Hirsh, Walberg & Peterson, 2013). As important as religious and spiritual beliefs are to societies, cultures, and individuals, little is known about which psychological factors determine choices of faith. Although there are likely many determinants of religious, spiritual, atheist or agnostic beliefs, this study explored four possible factors: critical thinking skills, need for cognition, need for emotional comfort/security, and need for closure. Participants included an undergraduate sample and a community sample. It was hypothesized that religious and spiritual individuals will have lower critical thinking skills, lower needs for cognition, higher needs for emotional comfort/security and higher needs for closure than agnostic and atheist individuals. Hypotheses also included potential interactions between these variables in predicting each faith path. Religiosity was measured using the I/E Religious Orientation Scale - Revised (Gorsuch & McPherson, 1989) and Spirituality was measured utilizing the Brief Multidimensional Measure of Religiousness/Spirituality (BMMRS) (Fetzer Institute, 1999). These two faith paths were also self -reported by participants after definitions of each were provided. Atheist and Agnostic beliefs were only measured through self-report. Results indicated that both measures of logic (critical thinking skills and need for cognition) and emotional comfort/security (Need to Belong and Religious Motivations) predicted various faith paths. Limitations included sample characteristics and small numbers of Atheist and Agnostic individuals. A better understanding of the motivations for choosing either spiritual or non-spiritual paths may assist in further explanation of the multiple roles each faith choice plays in individual lives.