Originální studie:

Garcia, D. M., Schmitt, M. T., Branscombe, N. R., & Ellemers, N. (2010). Women's reactions to
ingroup members who protest discriminatory treatment: The importance of beliefs about inequality
and response appropriateness. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40(5), 733-745.


Method and data description (pozn.: drobně upraveno pro potřeby semináře)

"To illustrate how to test for and interpret moderation using this procedure, I rely on data from
Garcia, Schmitt, Branscombe, and Ellemers (2010) published in the European Journal of Social
Psychology. The data file is named PROTEST and can be downloaded from www.afhayes.com. In this
study, 129 participants, all of whom were female, received a written account of the fate of a
female attorney (Catherine) who lost a promotion to a less qualified male as a result of
discriminatory actions of the senior partners. After reading this story, the participants were
given a description of how Catherine responded to this act of sexual discrimination. Those randomly
assigned to the no protest condition (coded PROTEST = 0 in the data file) learned that though very
disappointed by the decision, Catherine decided not to take any action against this discrimination
and continued working at the firm. The remainder of the participants, assigned to a protest
condition (coded PROTEST = 1 or 2 in the data file), were told that Catherine approached the
partners with the request that they reconsider the decision, while giving various explanations as
to why the decision was unfair. In PROTEST = 1, Catherine argued based on wrong assessment of her
individual qualities. In PROTEST = 2, Catherine argued based on underestimating women abilities in
general. Following this procedure, the participants were asked to respond to six questions
evaluating Catherine (e.g., Catherine has many positive traits, Catherine is the type of person I
would like to be friends with). Their responses were aggregated into a measure of liking, such that
participants with higher scores liked her relatively more (LIKING in the data file). In addition to
this measure of liking, each participant was scored on the Modern Sexism Scale, used to measure how
pervasive a person believes sex discrimination is in society. The higher a person’s score, the more
pervasive he or she believes sex discrimination is in society (SEXISM in the data file). The focus
of the study was to assess the extent to which the action of the lawyer affected perceptions of
her—specifically how much they liked her—and whether the size of such effect depends on a person’s
beliefs about the pervasiveness of sex discrimination in society."

-          Hayes, Andrew F.. Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process
Analysis: Methodology in the Social Sciences (Page 220). Guilford Press. Kindle Edition.