Department of Psychological Science
University of Mary Washington
Mercer Hall
1301 College Avenue
Fredericksburg, Virginia 22401
540-654-1054
https://cas.umw.edu/psychology/
Privacy: This website does not collect information about its users other than the name/email shared when leaving comments.
***This site is best viewed using the Chrome or Firefox browsers***
Found an issue with the site?
Contact Dr. Mindy Erchull: merchull@umw.edu
I wonder about the manipulation. Do you think that asking the “neutral” group instead to write about something entirely distinct from “knowledge” might have been more effective? Or, better yet, having them write something explicitly anti-science?
Yes! I do believe that having the neutral group write about something explicitly anti-science would have been more effective at revealing whether those with no belief have less existential anxiety than those who affirmed their scientific beliefs. Asking them to write about knowledge in general was a bit too specific, as it may not have kept participants entirely neutral. Writing something specifically anti-science would be something future studies could attempt!
Yes! I do believe that asking the neutral group to write about something anti-science might have been more effective than asking them about the much more broad topic of knowledge. Writing something explicitly anti-science would have better revealed if those with no beliefs had more existential anxiety than those with scientific beliefs. This could be improved upon in future studies!
This is an interesting study. Do you think that possibly assigning participants to write on both prompts and have the 14 survey question after each prompt would help with possibly getting significant effects and be a determinant of scientific belief? That way, the participants are being exposed to both scenarios while also thinking about their belief. Counterbalancing could help with making sure that there is not a bias towards one question or another.
I love your study, it is a very interesting topic. I think perhaps making this a within-subject study would have given you guys a higher power and therefore you wouldn’t have to worry about the lower number of participants. I think that way your results (which went in the anticipated direction) would have been more significant.
Hi Shelby and Trimby! I thought your research was very interesting and relevant. Do you think certain areas of science can have an affect on existential anxiety as well? For example, maybe if someone studies climate science?
Do you think your results may have been influenced by the current sociopolitical climate? With an ongoing pandemic, the recent trends on social media toward distrust in science, and climate change, I can imagine a shift in thinking that may be influencing either belief in science OR anxiety about the future.
I think the current climate certainly could have had a big impact on people’s views towards science and faith, especially when it comes to big, existential questions, so it could have had a significant effect on our results. There’s been far more talk about death and illness, especially for older people, for the duration of our experiment, which may have caused participants to reaffirm their faith before testing began. A similar study in the future might be able to have more accurate readings for people who aren’t part of our “new normal”, which requires extra attention with both faith and anxiety.