15.08.2013 Views

Copyright Malvin Porter, Jr. 2010 - acumen - The University of ...

Copyright Malvin Porter, Jr. 2010 - acumen - The University of ...

Copyright Malvin Porter, Jr. 2010 - acumen - The University of ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

participant child variable such as Gender and Bully/Victim Group Membership<br />

(Nonbully/Nonvictim vs. Victim vs. Bully vs. Bully/Victim). Story variables included Story<br />

Character Role (Bystander vs. Victim) and Story Form <strong>of</strong> Victimization (Physical vs.<br />

Relational).<br />

Question Six<br />

Do the difference in proportions <strong>of</strong> children’s CBVS Action Choices that are coded as either<br />

Prosocial or Aggressive and CBVS Justification Choices that are coded as either<br />

Prosocial/Care, Aggressive/Retribution, or Justice/Fair relate to participant child Gender (male<br />

vs. female), Story Character Role (Bystander vs. Victim), Story Form <strong>of</strong> Victimization (Physical<br />

vs. Relational) and Bully/Victim Group Membership (Nonbully/Nonvictim vs. Victim vs. Bully vs.<br />

Bully/Victim)?<br />

Gender and Action Choices<br />

A Chi-Square (Ҳ 2 ) Test for Independence was used to determine whether there is a dependency<br />

between Prosocial Action Choices, Aggressive Action Choices, and participant children’s<br />

gender. <strong>The</strong> non-significant Chi-Square (Ҳ 2 ) (1, N=632) = 5.27 , p = .0217, Cramer’s V = 0.1645,<br />

shows that there is no significant dependency between gender and Action Choice. <strong>The</strong>refore, I<br />

conclude that the frequency <strong>of</strong> Action Choices is not related to the gender <strong>of</strong> participant children.<br />

See Table 20 and Figure 4.<br />

99

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!