Directional Hypothesis

1) What were the two hypotheses in this study? Put them in your own words and phrase them as directional hypotheses (i.e., statements of what the researchers expected to find based on introduction section of the article). 6 pts Example of a directional hypothesis: Dogs will spend more time in physical contact with their sick owners than will cats.
The first hypothesis was homophobic men are more sexually aroused to homosexual signs then non-homophobic men. The second hypothesis was homophobic men are more hostile or aggressive than non-homophobic men.
2) Did the results of the study support or refute the researchers’ first hypothesis/prediction? Explain how you came to this conclusion. 3 pts
The results of the study support the researchers
How many levels were there? Explain what they were and what the manipulation was for each level. 5 pts
The independent variable in this study was the heterosexual men. There were two levels, which were homophobic men, and non-homophobic men. For each level, the men were manipulated by being exposed to sexually explicit erotic stimuli consisting of heterosexual, male homosexual, and lesbian video tapes.

6) What were the dependent variables in this study? How were each measured? 4 pts
The dependent variable is arousal in heterosexual men who admitted negative affect toward homosexuals. This was measured by using a penile plethysmography. The second dependent variable is aggression. Aggression was measured by an aggression questionnaire.
7) What Freudian defense mechanism did this study explore? 2 pts
In my opinion, the defense mechanism this study explored was the reaction formation. The reason why I say this is because heterosexual men who are homophobic are more likely to have homosexual cues. They usually will be homophobic because they want to hide the fact that they are homosexual. All in all, being homophobic is a way to hide the true colors of how someone is