Personality Traits and Framing Effects on Food Assessment

Assignment Overview

1: Measures Used in the Survey

Provide a description of the measures used in the survey (Studies 1 and 2). Include:

• Reference for each measure.

• Number of items in each measure.

• How each measure is rated.
  (2 marks)

Context from the survey:

• Study 1: Near replication of Bates (2023), focusing on the relationship between personality traits (6 traits from HEXACO) and willingness to try/buy/pay for insect-based meat alternatives. Use the same two measures as in the Bates paper.

• Study 2: Tested the impact of framing information (health/environment/social norm/neutral) on willingness to try/buy/pay for insect-based meat alternatives. Participants rated 4 different insect-based alternatives.

2: Scoring of the Measures

Describe how the measures are scored and explain what the numbers represent.
(2 marks)

Context from the survey:

• Personality traits measured via HEXACO, scored according to standard guidelines in Bates (2023).

• Willingness to try/buy/pay scored on a Likert scale (e.g., 1–7), where higher scores indicate greater willingness.

3: Research Design

What research design was used for each hypothesis? Explain why this design was appropriate to answer the hypothesis.
(2 marks)

Context from the survey:

• Study 1: Correlational design – examines the relationship between a personality trait and willingness to try/buy/pay.

• Study 2: Experimental design – participants randomly assigned to one of four framing conditions to compare differences in willingness to try/buy/pay.

4: Research Hypotheses

Provide your 2 research hypotheses below. Your hypotheses should:

• Mention the measure outcomes/scores.

• Describe the relationship between the outcomes.

• Be specific and directional.
  (4 marks)

Example context:

• Study 1 (Correlational): It is predicted that individuals with higher levels of extraversion will report greater willingness to try, buy, and pay for insect-based meat alternatives.

• Study 2 (Difference/Experimental): It is predicted that willingness to try, buy, and pay for insect-based meat alternatives will be higher in the health-framing group compared to the neutral-framing group.

Brief Summary of Assessment Requirements

The assessment required students to complete a short workbook-style task addressing Studies 1 and 2 of a survey on insect-based meat alternatives. The key pointers to be covered were:

1. Measures Used in the Survey (2 marks)

   • Describe the measures used in each study.

   • Provide a reference for each measure (Bates, 2023).

   • Include the number of items and rating scale.

2. Scoring of the Measures (2 marks)

   • Explain how each measure is scored.

   • Clarify what the scores represent (e.g., higher scores indicate greater willingness).

3. Research Design (2 marks)

   • Identify the research design used for each study.

   • Explain why the design was appropriate to answer the hypothesis.

4. Research Hypotheses (4 marks)

   • Provide two specific and directional hypotheses.

   • Include measure outcomes/scores.

   • Describe the relationship between variables or differences between groups.

Learning objectives:

• Understand and describe survey measures and scoring.

• Apply research design principles to justify hypotheses.

• Develop specific and directional research hypotheses based on survey context.

• Enhance analytical and academic writing skills.

Step-by-Step Assessment Approach Guided by the Academic Mentor

Step 1: Understanding the Survey and Measures

• The mentor reviewed the survey structure with the student, explaining Study 1 (HEXACO personality traits and willingness to try/buy/pay) and Study 2 (effect of framing on willingness).

• The student was guided to identify the measures from Bates (2023) and note the number of items and rating scales for each measure.

Step 2: Explaining Scoring and Interpretation

• The mentor helped the student understand the scoring of the HEXACO personality traits according to standard guidelines.

• The Likert scale for willingness measures (1–7) was explained, clarifying that higher scores indicate greater willingness.

Step 3: Identifying Research Design

• The mentor explained why Study 1 used a correlational design, suitable for examining relationships between personality traits and willingness.

• For Study 2, the mentor highlighted the use of an experimental design with random assignment to different framing groups, suitable for comparing differences in willingness outcomes.

Step 4: Formulating Hypotheses

• The student was guided to create two specific and directional hypotheses:

  1. Study 1 (Correlational): Predicting a positive relationship between extraversion and willingness to try/buy/pay for insect-based meat alternatives.

  2. Study 2 (Experimental): Predicting higher willingness to try/buy/pay for insect-based meat alternatives in the health-framing group compared to the neutral-framing group.

• The mentor emphasised the importance of linking hypotheses to specific measure outcomes and previous literature (Bates, 2023).

Step 5: Drafting and Reviewing

• The student drafted answers in full sentences under each question.

• The mentor reviewed the responses for clarity, coherence, and alignment with the assessment requirements.

• Minor edits were made to ensure each section clearly addressed marks criteria and word limit considerations.

Outcome of the Assessment

• Measures: Student successfully described the HEXACO personality traits and willingness measures with correct items, references, and rating scales.

• Scoring: Clear explanation of scoring methods and interpretation of Likert-scale scores.

• Research Design: Correct identification of correlational and experimental designs with appropriate rationale.

• Hypotheses: Two well-structured, specific, directional hypotheses linked to measure outcomes.

Learning objectives achieved:

1. Knowledge of survey measures, scoring, and data interpretation.

2. Understanding and application of research design principles.

3. Ability to formulate specific, directional hypotheses based on empirical context.

4. Development of structured, analytical, and academically sound responses.

Achieve Academic Success Safely with Our Assignment Solutions

Looking to understand how to structure and approach your assignment? Our sample solution provides a clear example of a well-prepared response, helping you see the format, key points, and approach needed to excel. Download it for reference only submitting it as your own work is considered plagiarism and can have serious academic consequences.

If you want a completely original solution tailored to your needs, our team of professional academic writers can create a fresh, plagiarism-free assignment that meets your requirements. Ordering a custom solution ensures you get:

Benefits of Ordering a Fresh Solution:

• 100% original and plagiarism-free content.

• Written specifically according to your assessment guidelines.

• Properly structured with clear arguments and in-text citations.

• Helps you understand the topic while maintaining academic integrity.