hello guys so this is a re-upload of the Perry notes because there was a technical issue so I had to remove the previous video and I've had to make a whole another one but let's do this again so I'm covering the Perry study on personal space this is a social approach study it's one of the five new studies in the new psychology 9990 2024 syllabus so let's try to understand personal space by looking at this image imagine yourself the person on the left in the circle there's another person who's right outside that Circle you are okay with the distance between the two of you this is your prefered personal space or interpersonal distance that you're comfortable with with this individual however if they come too close to you then that is not okay you start to feel uncomfortable so this interpersonal distance that you prefer with this person could depend on multiple factors and these factors could include your empathy levels could also include who the person is is it a friend is it a stranger is it an acquaintance so there are different factors that could affect your preferred interpersonal distance which is essentially what Perry wants to look at in the now let's talk about the background of the study um students have asked me the if it's important to learn the background and I would say it is now because it's only recently in the 2023 March paper that they asked a question on the background of a study for the very first time and in the October November exam which just happened recently there was another four mark question on the background so yes you would have to know the background of a study so the background of the study of um Perry study is well first we have to understand what interpersonal distance is so interpersonal distance or personal space the definition is it's the distance between two people and your preferred interpersonal distance may vary depending on the relationship that you have with others so like I said your personal space preference with your friend with your family members would be very different compared to how it would be around an acquaintance or a stranger now Edward T Hall in 1966 actually proposed four zones of personal space these are the intimate personal social and public zones the intimate zone is used between romantic Partners or very close family members and it involves all the senses of touch smell sight Etc the personal zone is used with other people in everyday interactions in which we can see touch and hear the other person so this is a very close Zone that we use but it's not as close as the intimate Zone the social zone is used in more formal interactions so people are slightly further away so there's a need for slightly louder voices more body movements and eye contact and lastly is the public Zone imagine yourself as a student with the teacher giving a speech or a lecture in the class so naturally there would be far away from you so this is basically the zone that is used to keep from public figures such as someone making a speech in which a loud voice and body movements can usually feature now the psychology being investigated is also very important um it's quite common for a question to come on the psychology being investigated these are just psychological Concepts that are being tested in the study and questions on psychology being investigated could range from two to five marks if it's a two mark question they may ask you to describe one psychological concept such as social salience or empathy but if a more general question comes on the psychology being investigated for let's say around four to five marks then you would have to describe each of these terms so the first term is oxytocin now oxytocin is a social hormone that is found in humans and it plays a very important role in Social bonding it also has been seen to promote pro-social Behavior now oxytocin is is referred to as a love hormone or a cuddle hormone and like it says over here it plays a very important role in Social bonding so a mother and child who develop a very strong bond especially during the breastfeeding stage oxytocin would play very important role in that your bond with your best friend with your family members if it's a very strong and close Bond then oxytocin is the hormone that has a major role to play play in that Bond development however oxytocin can actually have a differential effect now when I say differential effect I mean it can have a different effect on different people depending on your level of empathy so the idea is that if someone has high levels of empathy oxytocin would actually promote social bonding would promote a closer personal distance for them with others however those with lower levels of empathy oxytocin can have the complete opposite impact it can may lead to Envy hostility and it may even want you to be further away from others so the differential effect of oxytocin due to your levels of empathy is something that Perry is very interested in her study which is what we're going to be looking at when we begin the procedure what is empathy empathy is understanding someone else's experience by perceiving it from their point of view so it's basically putting yourself in the shoes of another person and just understanding what it would be like from their perspective now social cues are expressions body language that we use to communicate to send messages across to another person for instance smiling to indicate happiness social salience refers to the importance or the attention that we give to these cues from another person so how much attention do you give to these Expressions this body language um these uh facial expressions that someone is using to send a message across to you and the social salience hypothesis basically predicts that oxytocin will actually increase your attention to these social cues and it affects the way that you may process these cues and respond in different ways depending on the social setting so according to the social salian hypothesis oxytocin may actually perhaps enhance your attention to social cues and this could have a very different effect on different people so people with high empathy they may be more they may notice social cues more they may pay more attention to social cues of people it may promote a closer interpersonal distance whereas people with low levels of empathy oxytocin may have different impact and they may prefer a further distance so this brings us to the aim of the study um I've written two aims over here you can learn either one both of them will be marked correctly because they've been taken from two sources the first is to investigate how oxytocin affects preferred interpersonal distance for people scoring high or low in the trait of empathy um the other aim is to test the differential effect of the social hormone oxytocin on personal space preference in relation to a person's empathy abil ability so exactly what I said how oxytocin can affect your personal distance depending on your empathy levels this is a lab experiment so it's conducted in a highly artificial and controlled setting of a Lab at the University of highi in Israel and with any lab experiment there will be an IV a DV as well as an experimental design along with being a lab experiment it is also self-report study because there'll be an iri online questionnaire that will be used and it'll be through this questioner that will be that we will assess your empathy levels now the interesting thing about this study is that there are two experiments experiment one and experiment two each experiment has three IVs and one DV now something that Perry is going to be testing over here is an interaction effect an interaction effect is when we have multiple IVs and they combined to affect the DV this is something we see in the study by pavin where there are many independent variables such as the condition of the victim the race of the victim and the interaction of these IVs is basically we're testing the interaction of these IVs and how they affect the dependent variable of helping behavior in the pavin study so similarly in this study for experiment one we are looking at the interaction of three IVs which are empathy treatment and condition and how these interact and combine to affect the DV of an individual's preferred interpersonal distance so let's look at each IV independently so the first IV is empathy this will be operationalized by either being high or low so participants with a score of 40 and above in the iri online questionnaire will will be the ones who will be be in the high empathy condition and those with a score of under 33 will be in the low empathy condition so you can either be in the high or low empathy condition so this would be an independent measures design the second IV is that of treatment and this will be operationalized by giving the participants either oxytocin or a placebo Placebo is basically a control it's in the form of a salian solution and participants will be administered both oxytocin and Placebo in different experiments um so this would be a repeated measures design and the third IV is the condition now when we say condition we want to test your preferred interpersonal distance depending on different types of people which means you may be closer you may prefer a closer distance with a close friend but not as close a distance with a stranger or an acquaintance or perhaps even an object so over here four conditions are being used for the IV of the condition and we refer to these conditions as either figures or protagonists so these four protagonists are a stranger an authority an authority would be like a boss or a teacher a close friend or an object an object in the form of a ball so naturally our preferred distance can vary on who the person is whether it's a stranger Authority or friend but we also want to see how objects may have an impact in our preferred interpersonal distance hence the inclusion of the ball and the dependent variable is the preferred interpersonal distance and this will be measured by using something called a CID Paradigm which we'll talk more in detail about when we begin the experiment so iv1 is an independent measure design whereas iv2 of treatment and condition will be a repeated measures design as participants will be shown both the stranger Authority friend and the ball so it's not like two particip sorry one group is being exposed to two conditions of the stranger Authority and another group is being exposed to friender ball that is not the case it's a repeated measure design so everyone will be going through all four conditions and this is the ibdv of experiment one experiment two also has three IVs which are two of which um two of are the same as in experiment one so empathy being high or low and treatment of oxytocin or a placebo however the third IV of condition is slightly different the third IV would be either the condition of positioning of chairs which is an experimental condition or positioning of a table and plant which is the control condition now this may seem very confusing but once you begin Experiment 2 and I talk about the procedure it'll be a lot more clear to you as to what really is happening over here and The dv4 Experiment 2 is simply choosing the task or the task of choosing the rooms and this will be operationalized by the average preferred distance between two chairs and the average preferred angle of the two chairs again this may seem very confusing initially but once we begin the procedure I'll explain what all of this means so the IV of empathy would be an independent measures design whereas for treatment and condition just like in experiment one is repeated measures let's discuss the sample so it's important to remember the features of the participants because question can come in paper one as well as paper two where they may ask you to describe two or three features of the sample nowadays they've started asking a question in which they just directly say describe the sample for four marks so so you would have to describe every feature of the participants or the sample that is in the study so in this study we have 54 participants who are all male and they are undergraduates from the University of hia in Israel 19 to 32 years of age with an average age of 25 years they received either course credit or payment for their participation so it's a volunteer sample five of them were left-handed with normal or corrected to normal eyesight which meant that they had pretty clear eyesight or they had glasses and this is an important um point because we're actually going to expose them to a computer screen in the procedure so we want to make sure that they can actually see it clearly and they had no history of psychiatric or neurological disorders okay let's talk about the procedure now so the procedure is what confuses most people because there's a lot happening in this study and the reason why there a lot happening is because of the interaction effect of three independent variables so there are two experiments experiment one and two which will happen one week apart on the exact same day at the same time so participants will come to the lab for experiment one and then they'll return one week later for experiment two at the exact same time and day however experiment one and two will be counterbalanced now counterbalancing is a research method term where there are two tasks that need to be performed by the participants in a study task a and task B half the participants will perform task a first and then task B whereas the other half will perform task B first and then task a so over here when we say that the two experiments are counterbalanced we basically saying that half the participants will perform experiment one first and then they'll come one week later to do experiment two whereas the other half participants will perform experiment two first and then experiment one one week later and the reason why we counterbalance the experiments of the task is to avoid order effects so the procedure will start with the oxytocin Administration where participants will be randomly administered either a treatment of oxytocin um specifically a solution of 24 international units in 250 ml of intranasal oxytocin or repo in the form of a Salan solution and this will be self-administered with participants using a nasal dropper in which they will administer three drops in each nostril this will be supervised however by a researcher this part of the procedure is a double blind technique now a double blind technique is when neither the participants nor the researchers know which condition the participant is in so the participants do not know if they are in the placebo condition or the control condition and this is obviously done to avoid any demand characteristics from their perspective and the researchers will not know either if the participants are in the placebo condition or the oxytocin condition and the reason why the experimentor should not know is to avoid any researcher bias because if they know that a certain participant is in the placebo condition or in the oxytocin condition they may already be expecting a certain Behavior here so to avoid researcher bias and to avoid demand characteristics and to increase the overall validity of the study they're using a double blind technique after this is done we will do the assessment of empathy so the participants are then going to take the iri questionnaire online and this is a questionnaire that has 28 items and each item will be rated on the five point scale and the scale will range from a to E A is does not describe me very well and E is does describe me well and these 28 items will include four categories or four different aspects of empathy and there'll be seven questions on each aspect so what are these four aspects or four subscales these are perspective empathy sorry perspective taking which is basically cognitive empathy then there is fantasy empathy which is empathy that you have for fictional characters such as um characters in a book or in a novel or a TV show then we have empathic concern which is your emotional empathy and lastly personal distress which is self-focused responses to others feelings other suffering so these are four aspects or subscales of empathy and there'll be seven items or seven questions on each which basically means 28 in total and you have to rate from a scale of a to e whether these statements of these different levels of empathy apply to you or not so through this you determining your level of empathy and participants will be allocated to either a high empathy condition and there were 20 participants who actually had a score of 40 and above so they formed the high empathy group and they were basically um aged 24 on average and there was a low empathy condition where there were 20 participants who had a score of 33 and under and their average age is 26 years as soon as the participants completed the iri questionnaire they were put in a quiet room for 45 minutes and they were given three issues of a popular Israeli nature magazine and they were asked to wait over here while they could just sit and read these magazines now there are two reasons why they're placed in this room one is to avoid any so social interaction and the second reason is so that the oxytocin can be absorbed absorbed in their body absorbed by the central nervous system and it reaches a plateau so that it can take effect so we'll move on to the procedure um experiment one and experiment two now but before that let's try to understand this interaction effect so I'm just giving you a brief overview of what you can expect in the study to just try and make it easy to understand experiment one and two so participants are going to be either in a high empathy condition or a low empathy condition and they're going to be administered either oxytocin or a placebo which basically means we can have four conditions those participants who have high empathy and have oxytocin those participants who have high empathy but were given the placebo then those who have low empathy and are administered oxytocin and then those who have low empathy and are administered the placeo now the idea is that people with high empathy they are the ones who are going to actually prefer a close interpersonal distance so if you have high empathy you will perhaps be okay with people being closer to you and this should be enhanced further if oxytocin has been administered by you so let's take two people person a and person B let's say that person a is the first condition High empathy and oxytocin and person B is high empathy and Placebo person a or rather person B who has High empathy and has been administered to Placebo they would prefer a close personal space with people however person a will also prefer a close personal space with people but that personal space will be even closer compared to personal B reason being the oxytocin now let's talk about person C and D person C is the person who has low empathy and they administered oxytocin and person D is the is an individual with low empathy but they are administered the placebo now I told you that oxytocin has a differential effect depending on your empathy level if you have high empathy you would prefer a closer distance but if you have low empathy it'll have the opposite effect where you will want people to be further away from you so person C and person D they have low empathy so they naturally would not be okay with close interpersonal distance person D who has low empathy and has been given to Placebo he would not prefer as close and interpersonal distance as person A and B the people with high empathy and person C who has low empathy in oxytocin he would also not prefer a close interpersonal distance but his distance would be even further away from person a b and d because he is the person with low empathy and oxytocin so that oxytocin is actually going to affect him in a way that he would want an even further distance from people and this distance that you are choosing or are comfortable with um around different people depends on who the person is who the protagonist is and if you remember there were four conditions a friend an authority um what was the third one a friend Authority a stranger and an object in the form of a ball so now let's add the condition the protagonist in this mix so let's go back to person a you have high empathy and oxytocin so you would obviously if you talk about the four conditions when we compare let's say a stranger to a friend so for all four of these people they would prefer a friend being closer to them than a stranger that is common sense anyone would be okay with a friend being closer to them compared to a stranger and anyone would be okay with a friend being closer to them than author than an authority figure however you may prefer an authority figure being closer to you than a stranger and when it comes to an object like a ball this could be different depending on people so maybe you prefer a ball being closer to you maybe you may not prefer this is actually what Perry wants to test does the personal distance with an object such as a ball have any role to play depending on your empathy and oxytocin levels so a person with high empathy and oxytocin would prefer their friend to be very close to them a person with high empathy and a placebo would prefer a their friend to be very close to them but not as close as person a and person C and D would be okay with the friend being close to them but not as close as person A and B and person C who has low empath and oxytocin is the person who's actually going to want to to maintain the most distance with the friend now let's talk about the stranger all four groups would want to have want to maintain a certain distance with a stranger and that distance would be a lot more than it would be with a friend or an authority figure now the distance that person a would maintain with the stranger would be the least because they have high empathy so they're naturally okay with people being closer to them and this would be enhanced by the oxytocin and person C would actually be the one who would want the most distance with the stranger because naturally you don't want to be close to a stranger you have low empathy so you are naturally inclined to having a further distance with people and the oxytocin would just enhance this even further so the distance between the low empathy person with oxytocin and a stranger would perhaps we are expecting be the furthest and the the relationship or sorry the distance between a friend and a person who has high empathy and oxytocin is the one that we're expecting to actually be the closest and then for the ball and the authority um we will see how each of these four groups each of these four conditions have their own preference for personal distance so that is essentially what Perry wants to see the interaction of these three IVs on your preferred interpersonal distance so that's the only confusing thing if you can understand this you will easily understand the rest of the study now how are we assessing your interpersonal preference that is going to be done through experiment one and experiment two so like I said half the participants will do experiment one first so those who are doing experiment one first they will be exposed to something called the C Paradigm the comfortable interpersonal distance design so the participants are going to be placed in front of a computer screen where a slide will appear and on the slide will be written one of the four protagonists so either stranger friend Authority or ball one of these four words will appear on the slide let's start with the stranger the slide will show the word stranger for approximately 1 second followed by a fixation cross for 0.5 seconds so let me just use my pointer so when you are the participant you are going to be seeing the stranger word appearing for one second immediately followed by the next slide where this plus sign this fixation cross will appear for 0.5 seconds this is just preparing you for the next Slide the next slide will be a circle with an individual in the center of the circle and another individual right outside the circle you have to imagine that this circle is a room and you are this person in the center of the room and the individual who was outside the room was the person that was indicated to you in the very first slide so a stranger so there is a stranger who is outside the room and you're in the center of this room you have to imagine that this stranger is going to enter the room and will approach you so the following slides will appear for 3 seconds where this stranger is going to start entering the room and will be approaching you you have a keyboard in front of you with a space bar button you will press the space bar at whatever point you are uncomfortable with this person approaching you so once this once the stranger starts to enter the room and approach you you will press the space bar at whatever point you want him to stop approaching you so this part of the study is actually testing what we call your interpersonal preference for approach avoidance how comfortable you are with a certain person approaching you at what point are you okay with a certain distance of them being away from you and the moment you press the space bar you are indicating that distance now the mean distance will be determined by the point at which you stop them so if you stop them Absol immediately which is when they're outside the room that would be an average distance of 100% And 0% would be when you do not press the space bar and the person approaches you and collides into you so there are two ways the trial would end either you press the space bar when you want them to stop approaching or you do not press the space bar at which point the person collides into you and at which point there would be 0% interpersonal space or 0% inter personal distance now the idea is that like I said the person with high oxytocin sorry the person with high empathy and oxytocin they may stop the stranger at let's say this point where they are close to you but the people with low empathy especially those who have been administered oxytocin they may stop the person almost immediately far away okay now the stranger is going to enter from this entrance we'll call it a door three times so you're essentially doing it three trials and the reason they're doing it three times is perhaps to test for reliability they're expecting you to stop the stranger at the same spot every single time um so we're looking for consistency in your interpersonal distance with the stranger however is not entering from just one door he is entering from this door three times and then there is another door let's say from here then the third one then the fourth one so he's actually going to be entering from eight different doors and he's going to enter three times from each door which means you are going to be doing this 24 times so there are 24 trials in which you have to select your preferred interpersonal distance with a stranger and then the exact same thing will be repeated for a friend for an authority and for the ball so 20 how was it 24 trials for the friend stranger ball in Authority which basically means a total of 96 trials and like I said we are expecting a closer distance a closer preference of interpersonal distance with a friend but this should be more for um the people with low with low empathy especially those administered oxytocin and less for people with high empathy especially for those with oxytocin stranger like I said is be expecting the most distance but not as much of a distance for high empathy especially with oxytocin but more of a distance for those with low empathy especially with oxytocin and Authority would be somewhere in between um The Stranger and the friend and the ball I could I said it could be either way because it is an object so we will see how people prefer their interpersonal space um with an object again depend depending on your level of empathy and oxytocin so these points are basically just repeating what I said that according to the social salience hypothesis we are predicting that oxytocin would make the participants with higher levels of empathy pick closer distances whereas those with lower empathy would pick the choice of further distances furthermore oxytocin would have a different effect on people depending on the protagonist so if it's friend stranger or authority or ball so some people may prefer closeness only with known figures such as a friend or authority but not with the stranger or ball or perhaps even closeness with any human figure but not with the ball and like I said this is the part of the experiment that is testing personal space preference in the context of approach avoidant let's discuss experiment two now so as I said earlier half the participants will be taking part in experiment one first first and then one week later they'll be taking part in this experiment whereas the other half will be doing this part of the experiment first and then they'll come one week later to do experiment one now this part of the experiment is called choosing the rooms experiment and this is the part of the experiment which is assessing your preferred interpersonal distance with respect to intimacy so after the participants go through two runs of the experiment which is the placebo and the oxytocin part they will be told that they will have to sit in a room with another person with whom they will discuss some really personal and intimate topics however this is not true this is just deception they're not actually going to be sitting with anyone but they don't know that just yet and they are told that in order for them to sit in a room with this person they need to prefer they need to select a room according to their preference so we will show them different pairs of rooms and these rooms the pairs of rooms will differ in terms of a few factors so let's take a look at the images that will be shown to these guys so these are animated computer generated um rooms and we'll tell them that based on their preferences we'll show them two pictures two different pairs combinations of two two um pictures and we'll ask them to pick their preference for each of the two that is known to them and then their overall preference will be calculated and um based on their overall preference we shall um create a room in which they will sit and they will have these intimate discussions with this person which however is not going to happen so as you can see there are certain aspects of um these images which are exactly the same such as um there is there are two chairs there is a table and a plant um there there's a clock on the wall there's a cabinet so there's also a light um on the ceiling the only thing um on which these images will differ is the distance and the angles at which these objects are placed and the angles at which the chairs or the table and plant will be placed will be either 0 degre angle in which they're facing each other so in which they are um facing you the screen an example of that is not shown over here um a 45° angle which is basically um if you see the chairs in the first two pictures on top um they're placed at a 45 degree angle or the table and plant in the bottom two pictures they are placed at a 45° angle and thirdly at a 90° angle which is basically um the positioning of the table and plant in the first two pictures on top or um the two chairs in the bottom two pictures so the chair condition the angle and the distance between the chairs and the angles at which they're facing will be called the chairs condition that is the experimental condition and the angle and the distance of the table and plant will be the control condition now the idea is that you are selecting the angle and the distance at which you want the chairs to be at because you are going to be sitting on this chair with another person in order to have this um discussion with them so that is why this is the experimental condition because we are assessing your personal um space preference uh while discussing personal topics with someone uh depending on how close you want to sit next to them and the reason why the table and plant is there is because it's just there as a control because we're not really expecting these um other objects in the room to have any real impact or effect on how you prefer um your interpersonal space um with um this person who you're going to be discussing these topics with so that's just there as a control now the distance between the two chairs could be anything from 20 cm to 300 sorry 20 cm to 120 CM or was it 140 I think it's 140 20 to 140 so the chairs could be either 20 cm apart 40 cm 60 80 100 120 or 140 cm apart so 20 to 140 with seven different combinations um with the 20 cm interval so as you can see the top two images the chairs are placed at 60 cm apart and in terms of angles like I said there are three possible angles at which the chairs can be placed 0° 45° which is the case in the top two or 90° which is the case in the bottom two similarly for the table and plant they can be placed at either a 0° angle 45° angle or a 90° angle and in terms of distance it would be either 200 CM apart or up to 320 CM so again seven uh um situations or seven instances or seven um conditions of the distance which could be 200 CM 220 240 260 280 300 or 320 CM apart so let's save the first two images are shown to you the first one on the the top left let's use my pointer so this image on the top left the two chairs are facing each other at a 45° angle with a 6 CM difference and the table and plant are at a 90° angle and they are at a 260 CM distance whereas the image on the right the table and plant are at a 320 CM distance with the same 90° angle and the chairs are the same as the first one so there's a 60 cm um distance between the chairs and they're both at a 45° angle and we will see which one the participant selects so the idea is that there shouldn't be much of a difference or preference for these two because remember we are expecting there to be a difference when you select um based on the difference in distance between chairs rather than the plant and the table so although the plant and table have a difference in their distance the chairs don't have any difference in their distance or in the angle so there shouldn't be really a big um difference in selecting these two selecting one image that you prefer from these two let's look at the top left and the bottom left in the top left we see that the chairs are again at a 45° angle with a 60 cm difference and the table and plant are at a 260 CM distance um at a 90° angle and in the bottom left picture the chairs are now even closer at a 40 CM distance and their angle is 90° and the difference between sorry the distance between the table and the plant is 320 cm and they're at a 45° angle now let's take for example the first and this sorry the top left and the bottom left images participants who have high empathy are more likely we're expecting at least more likely to pick the bottom picture as opposed to the top top picture when comparing it to the other conditions to the low empathy condition so we can basically come up with multiple combinations of pictures because the chairs can be anything from 20 to 12 140 cm apart and they can be at either a 0 45 or 90° angle similarly the tables can be any table and plant can be anything from 200 to 320 cm M apart with um again an angle of 0 45 or 90° so this gives you multiple combinations and based on these combinations we have a total of 84 pairs of images that will be shown to the participants and the participant simply has to pick the one image that they prefer from each pair and this will be repeated twice so that basically means 84 times done twice 84 time 84 trials done twice so that is um 168 trials again perhaps they're doing it two times to test for reliability test for consistency and their responses um now the idea is that people with high empathy and oxytocin they are the ones who should prefer a closer personal distance of the chairs and people withow empathy are the ones who should prefer a further distance of the chairs so let's say hypothetically if you have high empathy and oxytocin you might be preferring a 20 cm distance whereas someone with high empathy and um no oxytocin but Placebo might be preferring let's say a 40 or 60 cm distance and then we have the low empathy conditions so low empathy and Placebo would maybe prefer around let's say 80 cm distance and the person with low empathy and oxytocin might prefer the greatest distance of let's say maybe 120 CM so that's what we're expecting now the results were that the table and plant did not really have much of an impact um it was the chairs that actually did have an impact in their preference as we expected however it was only the distance that affected their preference not the angle so it didn't really matter if the angle was at 0 45 or 90 Dees but what did matter for person space preference was the distance between their so let's look at the results first let's look at the results of experiment one now I have um some detailed slides which has um the results of the studies um in Greater detail and like like over here I've given an overall um result so when we combine the three IVs so the treatment plus empathy plus condition combine what is the result but in these detailed slides I have the results of let's say um just empathy or empathy combined with just oxytocin so if you wish to you know um get a hold of those slides you can contact me um my email ID and my contact number has been provided in the very first slide so please feel free to message me if you wish to get a hold of those slides they also have um detailed points on the evaluations as well so let's look at the results of experiment one for the C now those participants who had high empathy and were administered oxytocin they actually had the closest personal distance for the four protagonists compared to the other groups and the low empathy partici ipants in the oxytocin Group which is the third group over here actually had the greatest distance for the four protagonists um compared to the other groups which is what was expected so this immediately tells you that this supports the social salience hypothesis now let's look at this in detail for the first group so as you can see everyone actually preferred their friend to be closer to them than any of the other protagonists and within the friend it was the High empathy and oxytocin group that wanted the friend that they were okay with the friend being closest to them with an 8.5% um preferred distance and the farthest distance was that of um the low empathy with um oxytocin which was 16.3 now the greatest distance was naturally with the stranger it was the most for the low empathy participants both around 40% and it was was less so for the high empathy participants 39 and 38% but again it wasn't much of a difference for the four conditions because again it's a stranger and you naturally would want to maintain a distance with a stranger let's look at it for Authority so the high empathy participants with oxytocin were the ones who had the least preferred um interpersonal um distance with the authority of 30.5% this was followed with the high empathy implic C of 33.9 and then finally the low empathy participants um the greatest distance was low empathy in oxytocin of 36.8 and then it was the low empathy imp place of 35 and when it comes to the object the ball the closest distance was of the high empathy in oxytocin with a percentage of 14.4 for the ball and then it was for the high empathy with place of 21% almost follow followed by low empathe oxytocin which had um the greatest distance of 26.8% now the low empathy in Placebo actually had less of a distance compared to high empathy in Placebo so this suggests that you know the object of a ball um you perhaps may not expect it to have a standard um response for people's preferred interpersonal distance um for everyone because again it's an object it's not a person with a person it might be very different but with an object there can be differences as you can clearly see those in the placebo conditions the high empathy people actually preferred a greater distance for the ball than the low empathy participants but when it came to oxytocin being administered then there was a big difference the high empathy participants actually had the least distance with the ball whereas um the low empathy participants had the greatest distance with the ball so again it shows the interaction effect it supports the hypothesis there's no surprising finding over here so this is pretty straightforward now let's talk about the second experiment results as I told you there was a difference in preference for chair distance but not for the angles participants in the high empathy group chose closer chair distances following oxytocin Administration than Placebo Administration and it had an opposite effect on those with the low empathy the low empathy levels so again as we expected however if we look at the results there wasn't a big difference as you can clearly see participants in the high empathy condition with oxytocin had an average of a 78 CM preferred distance of the jars and this is pretty close to the other three groups as well so if you look at the overall results it doesn't seem like there was a significant distance but um for experiment two we can say that if we look at the results in in depth in detail there was a slight preference um there was a slight difference where there was a greater preference for closer distance for the high empathy participants particularly with oxytocin and not so much with the low empathy participants so to conclude the administration of oxytocin does enhance social cues but this works in opposite ways for individuals depending on whether you have high or low empathy as I said the social salience hypothesis was supported and people with low empathy respond to oxytocin with a preference for greater distance whereas people with high empathy respond to oxytocin with a preference for a decreased personal distance however this personal space is also dependent on who the protagonist is as people um need less personal space between themselves with their close friends than they do with strangers okay a point I forgot to mention was that after the two experiments were included the participants were eventually debriefed so that's an important point for ethics in your evaluation okay issues and debates for the nature nurture debate I would say both sides are being favored nature because there is clearly a biological aspect to the study um oxytocin is a social hormone and it has a role to play in your preferred interpersonal distance however nurture can also be favored because people people irrespective of whether you are receiving oxytocin or not irrespective of whether you have high or low empathy were favoring a closer personal distance with someone who they know for example a close friend but not so much with a stranger and these are perhaps things that we can pick up or learn from our environment something that we learn as we grow up that it's okay it's okay to have people who we are close to family members close friends it's okay for them to be closer to us but it's common for us to learn that it's not um appropriate or it's not something that we would be comfortable with if a stranger were to be too close to us so from that aspect I would say it's favoring the nurture side in terms of the individual situational explanations again I would say both for example it's the situation of the participant being administered either oxytocin or a placeo that is having an effect on their preferred interpersonal distance um in experiment two also there are different situations of the rooms depending on the Angles and the distances of the chairs and the table and plant that is affecting the participants preferred interpersonal distance um so from that aspect it's situational but it can be individual um because some participants have high empathy some have low empathy so that depends on their own individual traits there may be some people who were in The Low empathy condition um who perhaps still preferred a closer distance with some of the protagonists compared to participants in the high empathy condition although overall we saw that yes there was less of a distance for high empathy participants with each protagonist and more of a distance for the low empathy participant but if we were to look at it individually there might have been a few participants who may have still preferred a closer distance for some of the protagonists compared to other participants in the high empathy group so from that aspect yes there may have been a few individual differences which could favor the individual um explanation but overall I would say it's on the situational side the application to Everyday Life of the study is that we learn that people with low levels of oxytocin would prefer greater distance between them and others and people who have autism are those who naturally have low levels of empathy so if we were to administer oxytocin to them it would not help them in any way if anything they would prefer a greater distance with people so people with a autism should not be administered oxytocin it would not help them improve on their communication or social skills in any way um because we have to remember that again their level of empathy is much lower secondly um we learn that people who generally have low levels of empathy if they are around people they would prefer a greater distance so we should respect that and we should maintain our distance with them because they may feel uncomfortable if we get too close to them so if we are aware of a person's level of empathy we can maintain our distance with them accordingly evaluation the reliability of the study is high because it's a lab experiment there are multiple controls uh the procedure is highly standardized everyone went through the exact same C paradigm everyone saw the same 96 was it 96 84 images in the in Experiment 2 that was repeated twice so the procedure could have been easily replicated because it was standardized in order to test for reliability validity is also strength um validity is a strength because the two experiments experiment one and two were counterbalanced to avoid any order effects other than that um the participants were deceived and were not were made to believe that they would actually um meet someone so their responses their preferences for the rooms would have been more accurate and not subject to demand characteristics so that would increase the validity however one way that validity may be low is if you remember they were taking an iri questionnaire so there is a self report that is being um used in the study and whenever a self-report is being taken by participants there is always a chance of socially desirable responses where people who let's say have low levels of empathy um May select answers on the questionnaire um in a way that they may wish to intentionally um increase their levels of empathy or at least their empathy score on the question matter so it would not be a very valid measure of whether they have high or low empathy so through that validity could be low ecological validity is a weakness as well because there is um there are many controls it's an artificial setting of a lab and um mundane realism is low as this is not something that we expect in everyday life it's your personal preference your personal space preference is based on um computer generated images uh computerized screen where they're showing you someone approaching you it's not something that is happening in real life maybe if you were actually in a situation where someone was approaching you it would allow us to have a better understanding of how you may react or a greater and more accurate um representation of your personal space preferences as opposed to selecting it on a computer so ecological and mundan ecological validity and mundan realism I would say is the weakness of the study as to is generalizability because it's a relatively small sample size of 54 participants all of whom are male so the findings cannot be applied to females um they're all from one University um so they may have certain similarities it's a particular age group so generalizability overall is a weakness because it's not a very representative sample data is quantitative um which is a strength because we can compare results of um different participants in high and low empathy conditions um whether they have oxytocin or Placebo and through this comparison we can determine whether the IV was affecting the DV or not um there isn't really any qualitative data so we just we're getting objective data but no real subjective information which may tell us the reason behind their preferences so a lack of qualitative data could be a potential weakness um what other points are there ethics there is consent because they volunteered and um they were debriefed the participants confidentiality was maintained you can say that perhaps there pschological harmm um people may be uncomfortable with um having to select someone such as a stranger approaching them maybe just the idea of a stranger approaching them might make them feel uncomfortable but more so than that the idea of having to be placed in a room where you would have to discuss intimate topics with someone could be something that might make you really uncomfortable although it did not happen but they were still told that that would happen so that may have caused them some level of psychological harm and secondly um like I said it's not something that didn't really happen so they were deceived although they were debriefed but you can still add this point as a weakness because there was clearly a bit of deception um any other points I think we're good okay so this was a lendy study only because there's a lot happening um in terms of the content there's not a lot but in order to explain the study it takes a bit of time because there is so much happening there's again you know the interaction of three IVs um so many combinations are going on so because of that it can be a little confusing it can be a little difficult to understand the study but hopefully with this presentation it makes it a lot easier for you guys um and I hopefully will not delete this either because um the previous video like I said was deleted for some technical reasons but um I'm hopeful that this will stay on my channel I will be uploading the studies notes for the other new studies as well as the old studies so all 12 studies should be up on my channel soon um along with research methods and additional study material but if you have any further questions or queries that you may want to ask you can always just message you can comment down below or you can contact me on the information I provided in the very first page and again if you want the detail slides please let me know and I will provide them to you all right see you with the next study soon