research articles

Examining the effect of impossible problem solving on state anger: Comparing in-person and MTurk participants

Authors

  • Thomas DiBlasi Long Island University - Post, New York https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0456-1000
  • Courtney Pisano St. Joseph’s University & St. Charles Hospital, New York
  • Kaleigh Keenan Long Island University & Fordham University, New York
  • Anthony Loiacono St. Joseph's University, New York
  • Brittany Vincent St. Joseph’s University, New York

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21827/ijpp.10.41840

Keywords:

MTurk, anger, Königsberg Bridge, state anger, trait anger

Abstract

This research comprises of two studies examining the effect of impossible problem solving on state anger. For the first study, using 155 participants on Amazon’s MTurk, a significant difference was observed on state anger from baseline to post-intervention (p = .04). Due to the well documented concerns about using MTurk participants, a second study involving 111 participants from a small liberal arts college was conducted. Using the same design, no significant effect of time on state anger was observed (p > .05). Post-hoc analyses indicated a significant difference between MTurk and in-person participants on trait anger (p < .05), pre-test state anger (p < .05), and post-test state anger (p < .05). Implications are discussed.

Published

2024-09-10

Issue

Vol. 10 (2024)

Section

research articles

Copyright (c) 2024 Thomas DiBlasi, Courtney Pisano, Kaleigh Keenan, Anthony Loiacono, Brittany Vincent

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Submission of an original manuscript to the IJPP will be taken to mean that it represents original work not previously published, that it is not being considered elsewhere for publication and, if accepted for publication, it will be published online. Copyright remains with the author. 

The journal takes the stance that the publication of scholarly research is meant to disseminate knowledge and, in a non-profit regime, benefits neither publisher nor author financially. It sees itself as having an obligation to its authors and to society to make content available online now that the technology allows for such a possibility.