Table 5.
Study | Outcome | VI 1 | VI 2 | Results | Effect size | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Prime | Control | |||||
Quinn and Crocker (1999) | Psychological Well being | Overweight | Overweight women in the prime condition show lower scores than overweight women in the control condition. | Not Estimable | ||
Normal weight | Prime did not predict differences in PWB. | |||||
Self-esteem | Overweight | Overweight women in the prime condition show lower scores than overweight women in the control condition. | ||||
Normal weight | Prime did not predict differences in SE. | |||||
Darnon et al. (2017) | School performance | Low SES vs. High SES | In the prime condition performance was significantly lower for Low SES students than high SES students, compared to control condition. |
ds = −4.43 [−5.38, −3.48] |
ds = −0.80 [−1.31, −0.29] |
|
School efficacy | In the prime condition school self- efficacy was lower for Low SES students than high SES students, compared to control condition. |
ds = −0.47 [−0.99, 0.05] |
ds = –0.12 [−0.60, 0.37] |
|||
McCoy and Major (2007)[study 1] | Attributions for rejection | Women | Discrimination vs. Internal attributions | In the prime condition, women were more likely to make internal attributions for the rejection (e.g., blame themselves) than blame on discrimination. Women in the control condition were no more likely to blame themselves than they were to blame discrimination | dz = −0.44 | d z = −0.18 |
Men | Discrimination vs. Internal attributions | In the prime condition, men were no more likely to blame themselves than they were to blame discrimination. in the control condition were more likely to blame themselves than they were to blame discrimination. | dz = −0.07 | dz = 0.70 |