Disdain for Public Executions

Statistical Tests of Mean (Ave.) Differences Among Execution Actors

Regarding the belief system that disdains public executions before large crowds and live televised executions, Soft Abstract Supporters reported the highest level of agreement (mean=4.27). They are followed by Abolitionists who also report high levels of average agreement at 4.11. Hard Abstract Supporters also tended to agree with the disdain belief system, although at a lower level (mean=3.64). Executioners posted average scores of 3.05, which is essentially neutral (neutral=3.00). When all four groups are compared, the differences in averages are statistically significant. The effect size is large; eta squared for this test is .23.


For the three groups that support executions, differences in means were statistically significant. This is largely due to Soft Abstract Supporters of the death penalty reporting much higher disdain than the other two pro-execution groups. The effect size is large; eta squared for this test is .24. 


When Soft Abstract Supporters and Hard Abstract Supporters were tested separately, the relationship was statistically significant. The effect size (eta squared) is .15. This might be described as above medium effect size, where eta squared=.09 is medium and eta squared=.25 is large.


Researchers also tested the difference between Abolitionists and Soft Abstract Supporters. The differences in means is statistically significant. However, the effect size is small. Eta squared for this test is .01.

NEXT>

-----


*Every person in the study had an average "score" for this belief system. That score ranged from 1.00 (strongly disagree) to 5.0 (strongly agree), where 3.0 is neither agree/disagree. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) tests differences in average scores across groups. Inherently, ANOVA is a more powerful statistic than the Chi-Square. As with the Chi-Square, a Sig. less than .05 indicates that differences in averages are significant. Further, ANOVA provides an estimate of effect size (eta squared). With non-probability samples, effect size is a more meaningful measure of the influence of underlying belief systems on roles (intended actions) that people play as execution actors.