Statistical Tests of Mean (Ave.) Differences Among Execution Actors
Regarding the actual sadism belief system that believes those executed should suffer while they die, three of the four groups reported means in the 'disagree' range. However, Executioners posted the highest average scores of 3.51, which is positive general agreement that those executed should be made to suffer. Hard Abstract Supporters reported the second highest average (mean=2.84 where 3.00 is neutral). Soft Abstract Supporters reported the third highest levels of average agreement at 2.50. Abolitionists reported the lowest level of agreement (mean=2.00) with actual sadism during executions. The test of the four groups indicated statistically significant differences in means. The effect size is a little shy of large; eta squared for this test is .21.
For the three groups that support executions, differences in means were statistically significant. This is largely due to Executioners reporting much higher actual sadism scores than the two abstract supporters of executions. The effect size is above medium; eta squared for this test is .13, where eta squared=.09 is considered a medium effect size.
When Soft Abstract Supporters and Hard Abstract Supporters were tested separately, the relationship was statistically significant. However, the effect size (eta squared) is .03. This is slightly larger than a small effect size, where eta squared=.01 is considered a small effect size.
*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.