Types of Interaction Patterns

(A) Triangle patterns: One unique condition

1.Terminative interactions
Either variable alone is sufficient to produce the effect
Variables are substitutable: Disjunctive effect
Both together produce no further gain
Technically, two main effects, but really only a simple effect
of B at A1, or A at B1. That is, only one slope is significant
from two lines.
A1

A2
B2

B1

B2

B1

A1

A2

Examples:
1. Effects of drugs (A2) or therapy (B2) on depression
compared to controls? Terminative is when one treatment is
enough. Either is sufficient, dont need both for cure.
2. Either high self-esteem (HSE: B2) or a success experience
(A2) increases social confidence in meeting a new
acquaintance.

2. Catalytic interactions
Only the right chemistry, combination of two variables
produces the effect
Conjunctive effects: Both variables together are necessary.
Potentiate each other
Two main effects, but largely a simple effect for B at A2 or A
at B2. That is, only one slope is significant from two lines.
Use condition 1 to indicate the control group of no real
experimental event (eg., A1 and B1). Also use to indicate low
value of a variable such as low self-esteem (B1)
A1

A2
B2

B1

B2
B1
A1

A2

Examples:
1. Both drugs and therapy contribute to the cure: Either is
useless without other. Together, they have the chemistry.
2. Only high self-esteem individuals (B2) benefit from
personal successes (in terms of confidence, mood): That
is, to enjoy a success it is necessary to also have HSE.

(B) Ordinal or Spreading Interactions

3. Synergistic Interactions
A particular combination amplifies or reinforces an effect.
That is, a variable has more of an effect at some level of the
other variable
Similar to catalytic, but both slopes are significant.
However, one of the two slopes is steeper than the other
Large simple effect of A at B2 (or, B at A2), small simple
effect of A at B1 (or B at A1).
A1

A2
B2

B1

B2

B1

A1

A2

Examples:
1. Drugs (A2) are useful by themselves, but are especially
beneficial when combined with therapy (B2).
2. A personal success (A2) is enjoyed a bit by low self-esteem
people (B1) , but is especially savored by high self-esteem
people (B2)

4. Fan Interaction
The slopes of the two lines are in opposing directions,
resulting in a fan-shaped graph with lines that spread
apart
The effect of B is apparent largely at A2
The effect of B is magnified or polarized at A2
A1

A2
B1

B1

B2

B2

A1

A2

Examples:
1. Drugs (A2) have a positive effect compared to placebo
(A1) when combined with therapy (B2), but without
therapy (B1), they actually make things worse.
2. Success (A2) has a positive effect on high self-esteem
people (B2), but it actually makes low self-esteem people
(B1) feel worse.

If the variable having the effect is B, put the context

variable (the when condition, A) on the horizontal axis
Otherwise, the same* interaction will appear as below, a
shape that is more difficult to recognize
A2

A1

B1

B2

(C) Disordinal or Antagonistic Patterns

5. Cross-over Interactions
The effects of each independent variable are opposite at each
level of the other variable.
No main effects at all. Everything depends on everything!
Actually, quite similar to fan pattern in terms of opposing
slopes. That is, fan shape would eventually cross over if it
were extended
A1

A2
B1

B1

B2
B2
A1

A2

Examples:
1. Drugs and therapy work against each other. That is,
therapy (B2) has negative effects when combined with
drugs (A2) but does nicely without them (at A1).
Similarly, drugs (A2) are better than placebo (A1) when
there is no therapy (B1).
2. Swanns self-verification theory: Pretend that LSE = B2
this time. The low SE people react favorably to negative
feedback from others (A1) and unfavorably to positive
feedback (A2), whereas High SE people react in the exact
opposite way.

Within-subjects Designs
When combined with a between-subjects IV, result in a
mixed design
Two types: Not clearly separated in Pelham text
1. Repeated measures
Same or comparable measure is repeated at different times
O1 O2 X O3 O4
O1 O2
O3 O4
Each subject serves as his/her own control or baseline
Very precise design because controls for individual
differences
Very useful for high variability measures such as
physiological arousal or reaction times
Repeated testing threat to internal validity
2. Within-subject manipulations
Each subject receives all levels/conditions of one IV (or even
both IVs)
Very efficient because reduces number of participants
needed by one half

Example: Spencer study on stereotype threat

Male
Task

Female
Task
F

F
M
Male
Task

Female
Task

Male or female task is the within-subjects variable, whereas

gender is between-subject in this mixed design
BUT,
Order effects (testing effects such as time, practice, frame of
mind, etc)
Carryover or contamination effects: Changed meaning of IV
Initial experiences color later ones (mood,
interpretations, confidence etc)
Counterbalancing:
Complete. 3 conditions gives 3x2x1 =6 orders
Reverse. ABC and CBA
Partial. Random or Latin squares.

Purposes of Factorial Designs

1. Answering why or how questions: Identifying mechanisms
Demonstrating the reasons why things happen
Zanna: Dissonance and the pill (see Pelham)
Lie
Attitude Change

No Lie
No Pill

Pill

People see the cause of the arousal as the pill

Lack of rationalization in the Pill condition suggests that
tension/arousal is necessary for it to occur
Olson: Shyness and the pill
Pill

Public Performance
No Pill

Shy

Non-shy

Strong performance in pill condition by shy people

demonstrates their problem is anxiety not social skills

Murray, Holmes et al: Why LSE people distance themselves

from relationship partners
LSE
Expected Rejection

HSE
Control

Fail test

LSE people assume that partners will react to their personal

failures with rejection, and thus distance themselves
2. When do effects occur: Specifying critical conditions
What conditions most facilitate an effect?
Kunda and Sinclair: Evaluating a manager
Male

Rating of manager
Female
Positive
Negative
Performance Feedback

People react negatively to women in power only when it is

convenient to blame them to protect self-image

Lockwood and Kunda: Inspiration from superstars?

First Yr.
Self-evaluation

Fourth Yr.
Control
Superstar
Comparison

Superstars are only inspiring when people still have the hope
or opportunity to still measure up to the high standard
3. The Person and the Situation
Personality typically has a situational signature (Mischel and
Shoda). Shyness is only apparent in contexts where..
Certain situations reveal or uncover personality, make a
person show his or her true colors (Stress-diathesis models)
Simpson: Attachment insecurity is only apparent under
interpersonal stress
Insecure style
Act angrily/distant

Secure
Small issue Serious issue
Level of Conflict

Downey found the exact same pattern using a withinsubjects design where people kept daily diaries about their
relationships. She compared peoples behavior the day after
a conflict vs. the day after a peaceful day.
Swann: Self-verification theory (Pelham, p. 147)
LSE
Liking/comfort
HSE
Negative
Positive
Feedback

People like feedback on their traits from others that is

consistent with their self-views
Wood & Giordano: Self-esteem and social comparison
LSE
Amount comparison
With other
HSE
Failure

Success

LSE only compare with others when it is safe to do so

4. Block designs and generalization across samples

Does an effect hold for different types of people? Is it a
general law or specific to type of person?
Heine and others: Cross-cultural research
Most scientists expected that well-known effects were
universal and would generalize to Asian cultures
Example: More defensive attributions (excuses) after failure
Asian

Control

Western

Western

Asian

Failure

Control

Expected pattern

Failure

Actual pattern

Example: Positive illusions strengthen when threat to

feelings of confidence about close relationship
Western

Asian

Asian

Control

Threat

Expected pattern

Western

Control

Threat

Actual pattern