'Corona Threat and Party Affiliation'
(AsPredicted #37715)
Download PDF

---

---

1) Have any data been collected for this study already?
No, no data have been collected for this study yet.

2) What's the main question being asked or hypothesis being tested in this study?
We hypothesize that a heightened perceived threat through the Coronavirus is associated with heightened passive party support to participants’ preferred political party as well as heightened control restoration motivation. Furthermore, heightened perceived threat through the Coronavirus should be associated with heightened ingroup bias, ingroup entitativity, and outgroup derogation.
We furthermore hypothesize that the proposed association of perceived threat through the Coronavirus and the dependent variables outlined above is mediated by increased behavioral inhibition.


3) Describe the key dependent variable(s) specifying how they will be measured.
BIS (mediator): The state level of behavioral inhibition will be assessed via the following 8 items: „afraid, scared, frightened, nervous, jittery, shaky, inhibited, worried “
Passive Party Support: First, participants will be asked about their political affiliation towards either the Democratic or the Republican Party. Then, passive party support will be assessed via 4 items (“How much do you wish that the XYXY-party will get more votes than the XYXY-party?”, “How important would it be for you to listen to or watch an appearance of the presidential candidate of the XYXY-party on television or social media?”, “How much would you like being addressed by a representative of the XYXY-party in front of an election booth on the street?”, “How much would you like to use a pencil with the XYXY-party's logo at your workplace/at the university?”, Fritsche, Jonas, & Fankhänel, 2008).
Control Restoration Motivation: Control restoration motivation will be assessed via one item (“If you were to support the YXYX-party, would you have a feeling of ‘together we are strong’?”, Fritsche, Jonas, & Fankhänel, 2008).
Ingroup Bias: Ingroup bias will be assessed by assessing the warmth-, and competence-level participants perceive for their affiliated party as well as for the opposing party. Warmth will be assessed via the extent to which participants assign 2 characteristics (“warm”, “good-natured”) to the parties. Competence will also be assessed via the extent to which participants assign 2 characteristics (“competent”, “intelligent”) to the parties. The mean score of the warmth and competence items for the non-affiliated party will then be subtracted from the mean score of the warmth and competence items for the affiliated party to create an ingroup bias score (Fritsche, Jonas, & Ablasser, 2012).
Ingroup Entitativity: Entitatvity of the ingroup will be assessed via the extent to which participants agree with two statements (“Democrats/Republicans share a common nature.”, “Democrats/Republicans share common goals and a common fate.”, Fritsche, Jonas, & Fankhänel, 2008).
Outgroup Derogation: Outgroup derogation will be assessed by asking participants to which extent they agree to the following statements about the opposing party: “I would accept a Democrat/Republican working with me.”, “I would have nothing against a Democrat/Republican moving into the neighboring apartment/house.”, “I would not mind a Democrat/Republican marrying a member of my family.”, “I have positive feelings towards Democrats/Republicans.”, “I fully trust Democrats.”).

4) How many and which conditions will participants be assigned to?
No conditions will be assigned. The independent variable consists of participants‘ perceived threat through the Coronavirus. Participants’ level of perceived threat through the Coronavirus will be assessed with the following 15 items:
“Despite the Coronavirus, I can do just about anything I really set my mind to”
“The Coronavirus determines most of what I can and cannot do”
“Because of the Coronavirus, what happens in my life is currently beyond my control”
“The coronavirus interferes with the things I want to do”
“The unpredictability of the Coronavirus outbreak does not bother me”
“During the Corona pandemic, not having all the information I need is frustrating”
“I can’t stand that the coronavirus outbreak took me by surprise”
“The uncertainty surrounding the Coronavirus keeps me from living a fulfilled life”
“I doubt that I can deal efficiently with unexpected consequences of the Coronavirus”
“Even if I invest the necessary effort, I cannot solve the problems that arise with the Coronavirus”
“I can remain calm during the Coronapandemic because I can rely on my coping abilities”
“If the Coronavirus causes problems for me, I am sure I will find a solution for them”
“The corona pandemic surprised me”
“I expected the corona outbreak”
“The current corona situation was predictable”


5) Specify exactly which analyses you will conduct to examine the main question/hypothesis.
Simple regression analyses will be run to test the association between perceived threat through the Coronavirus and the dependent variables outlined above.
Mediation analyses via Hayes’ SPSS PROCESS macro will be performed. 5000 bootstrap samples will be created to establish a ninety-five percent bias corrected confidence interval for the expected indirect association of perceived threat through the Coronavirus via behavioral inhibition and the outlined dependent variables.
In all analyses, the degree of shared goals with the affiliated party will be added as a covariate.


6) Describe exactly how outliers will be defined and handled, and your precise rule(s) for excluding observations.
Participants who do not complete the survey and/or show a suspicious response pattern in the questionnaires by consistently ticking the same answer/Likert scale point will be excluded. Furthermore, an attention check (“please tick ‘not at all’ here”) is implemented in the outgroup derogation assessment. Participants who fail the attention check will also be excluded.

7) How many observations will be collected or what will determine sample size?
No need to justify decision, but be precise about exactly how the number will be determined.
The sample size was determined via a power analysis meant to establish the amount of participants needed to find the hypothesized mediation effect with a likelihood of 80%, setting alpha error probability to .05. The power analysis was conducted with Kenny’s (2017) MedPower application. We assumed an effect size of r = .15 for the association between perceived threat through the Coronavirus and behavioral inhibition, behavioral inhibition and the DVs, and perceived threat through the Coronavirus and the DVs when controlling for its indirect association with behavioral inhibition.
Given these effect sizes, a sample size of N = 453 would be required to detect the indirect association of perceived threat through the Coronavirus and the DVs over behavioral inhibition with a likelihood of 80%. We decided to recruit 500 participants to account for possible exclusions (as described above) and to compensate for drop-outs.


8) Anything else you would like to pre-register?
(e.g., secondary analyses, variables collected for exploratory purposes, unusual analyses planned?)
Nothing else to pre-register.