Search

36 male students, 29 undergraduate, and 7 graduate, were given a photograph of one of two women (one of whom was judged to be considerably more attractive than the other) and one of two “autobiographical” statements (one of which depicted a warm, friendly person and the other a cold, unfriendly person). Each subject examined the material from one of the four possible treatment levels and rated the woman for personality, social, and physical attractiveness. The subjects also rated themselves for physical attractiveness. Two 2 × 2 multivariate analyses of variance were performed to evaluate subjects' ratings of personality and social attractiveness and a 2 × 2 analysis of variance was used to evaluate ratings of physical attractiveness. Personality ratings were significantly increased by the friendliness and physical attractiveness of the stimulus while the social attractiveness of the woman was significantly increased only by her physical attractiveness. Ratings of physical attractiveness were significantly influenced only by the photographs. The subjects' self-ratings were uncorrelated with their ratings of the women's physical attractiveness.

Many statistical tests assume homogeneity of variance, and may be affected by the violation of this assumption. This is particularly the case with analysis of variance for unequal cell size. For this reason, a powerful and robust test to detect heterogeneity of variance is de­ sirable. Unfortunately, most commonly used tests of homogeneity of variance are sensitive to departures from normality, especially with respect to departures from nonzero kurtosis (Box, 1953). A test that has been shown to be robust to violation of distribution assump­ tions is the Scheffe test, described by Winer (1971, pp.219·220). In the Scheffe test, each treatment group is randomly divided into a number of subsamples, and their variances are computed. The logarithms of the variances are taken, and an analysis of variance is performed. Two major drawbacks exist with the Scheffe pro­ cedure. First, because the grouping of subsamples is random, the test does not yield a unique solution. This has led some to reject it as unacceptable (Brown & Forsythe, 1974). Second, the test generally has poor power to detect existing heterogeneity of variance. Description. The present program uses a Monte Carlo sampling procedure to minimize the uniqueness problem and to provide information on the power to detect a specified degree of heterogeneity of variance. Essentially, the program computes the F statistic for a randomly generated group of subsamples and repeats this process a specified number of times, each time operating on a newly generated set of subsamples. The size of the loop is presently set at 100. In this manner, a mean F ratio, based on the series of replications, provides a stable estimate of the F ratio, with reduced influence from random subsample formation. To provide information on power to detect a given level of hetero­ geneity of variance, a series of runs can also be performed on a set of internally generated normal random deviates with a built-in degree of variance heterogeneity. In this way, a simulation, conforming to a researcher's design in terms of sample size and number of treatment groups, yields an empirical estimate of power to detect a degree of heterogeneity of variance. The number of replications performed to provide an estimate of power is currently set at 500.

Singer, Gollob, and Levine (1967) found that Ss who had viewed brutal Goya etchings rated aggressive cartoons as significantly less funny than Ss who had viewed neutral Goya etchings; this effect did not occur with the nonaggressive cartoons. Singer, et al. attributed the decreased humor ratings to the psychoanalytic concept of mobilized inhibitions against aggression. The present study attempted to mobilize these inhibitions by means of a written description of torture. ColIege students (15 male and 15 female) were randomly assigned to three treatment groups. One group read a vivid description of a brutal torture-murder which was introduced in such a way as to condemn the act fully while a second group read the identical description so introduced as to mitigate the enormity of the torture (expected to lessen the inhibition effect). A control group read a nonaggressive passage of equal length. Immediately after reading the passage. all Ss rated 16 cartoons for humor on a four-point scale ranging from not funny to very funny. Eight of the cartoons were nonaggressive and 8 aggressive; the aggressive cartoons depicted beatings, torture, and murder. The cartoons were arranged in random order. A two-way analysis of variance (sex and treatment as main effects) was performed on the difference berween Ss' aggressive cartoon score and neutral score to check for the predicted differential lowering of ratings in the aggressive cartoons. Another two-wag analysis of variance was performed on rhe total humor scores to check for a possible generalized inhibitory effect. Neither test yielded significant results (Ps < 1.00). Although all but two of the 20 Ss reported that the torture description was unpleasant to read, it is quite possible that the treatment did not have the desired potenq. Or, it may have been that inhibitions were mobilized but that a concomitant arousal of aggressive drive neutralized the effect. Dworkin and Efran (1967) demotutrated that aggressive arousal is capable of increasing humor ratings of aggressive humor. It remains for fume research to determine the validity of the psychoanalytic framework by manipulating the degree to which each variable operates.