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

A test for the Difference in Proportions tested the following null hypothesis: There is no
difference between children’s CBVS Prosocial Action Choices for stories that involved bystander
story characters and the proportion of children CBVS Prosocial Action Choices for stories that
involve victim story characters.
Of the 316 responses to the Victim Story Character scenarios, 258 were Prosocial Action
Choices. Of the 316 responses to the Bystander Story Character scenarios, 230 were Prosocial
Action Choices. The estimate of the difference in the proportion of Prosocial Action Choice
responses when the Story Character was a bystander and the proportion of Aggressive Action
Choice responses when the Story Character was a Victim was -0.0886076. The hypothesized
difference in proportions of zero does not lie within the 95% CI (-0.153644, -0.0235711) for the
difference in proportions Prosocial Action Choice responses between the bystander and victim
story character roles. Therefore, zero is not a plausible value for the difference in proportions of
Prosocial Action Choice responses across victim and bystander story character roles. Therefore, I
reject the null hypothesis and I conclude that there is a difference in the proportions Prosocial
Action Choice responses across victim and bystander story character roles. Thus, I conclude that
children were more likely to choose Prosocial Action Choices when the story character role was
a victim than when the story character role is a bystander. See Table 28.
112