2007-08 Guilford Award Abstracts
Effects of Abrupt Withdrawal of Valproic Acid in Sprague-Dawley Rats
Allegheny College (PA)
First Place: Guilford Research Award
Faculty Sponsor: Rodney Clark, PhD
Previous research has shown that individuals who rapidly withdraw from antiepileptic drugs quickly relapsed to epileptic seizures. The present study examined the levels at which valproic acid induced seizures after its abrupt withdrawal. Six female Sprague-Dawley rats were given 3 acute doses of valproic acid for 1 week each, after which administration was abruptly withdrawn for 1 week. The results indicated that withdrawal of low doses of valproic acid (100-mg/kg) induced more seizures than higher doses of valproic acid (125-mg/kg and 150-mg/kg). This indicated that individuals who withdraw from valproic acid after short-term exposure are not at risk for the occurrence of seizures.
Impression-Managed Responding: The Use of Response Latencies to Identify Dissimulation
Washington University (MO)
Second Place: Guilford Research Award
Faculty Sponsor: Michael Strube, PhD
The use of personality measures in personnel selection has been widely criticized in light of evidence that individuals can effectively distort their scores. Cognitive models of response selection suggest that response times could be used to detect impression-management. This study used a within-subjects manipulation of instructions (i.e., respond honestly, make a good impression, make a specific impression) to examine whether the distribution of response times across response scale options could be used to identify faking on the NEO PI-R. The well-known inverted-U response pattern emerged when participants responded honestly, as well as when participants were asked to make a good impression or were given specific response instructions. The inverted-U response time pattern, therefore, cannot be used to identify faking.
Working Together or Not: Do Mutual Contributions Impact Rapport?
Pacific Lutheran University (WA)
Third Place: Guilford Research Award
Faculty Sponsor: Jon Grahe, PhD
The impact of mutuality of contributions on rapport was examined by manipulating the amount of contributions that each participant made while completing the tasks. A 2 (Structure: Mutual or Individual) X 2 (Task Type: Computer and Puzzle) X 2 (Order) mixed-factor design demonstrated that task structure impacted the rapport experience; dyads’ mutual contributions increased rapport compared to dyads in the individual condition. This effect of structure was larger for the puzzle task compared to the computer task. This increased rapport emerged at the cost of rapport agreement which was lower when the dyad made mutual contributions. These findings occurred because dyads in the individual condition focused more on interpersonal behaviors while dyads in the mutual condition focused on the tasks.