Philosophy:Lady Macbeth effect

From HandWiki
Revision as of 20:27, 25 June 2023 by TextAI2 (talk | contribs) (link)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
A painting by Gabriel von Max depicting Lady Macbeth attempting to clean her hand with the folded edge of her dress

The supposed Lady Macbeth effect or Macbeth effect is an alleged priming effect said to occur when response to a cleaning cue is increased after having been induced by a feeling of shame.[1] The effect is named after the Lady Macbeth character in the Shakespeare play Macbeth; she imagined bloodstains on her hands after committing murder.

Background

In one experiment, different groups of participants were asked to recall a good or bad past deed, after which they were asked to fill in the letters of three incomplete words: "W_ _H", "SH_ _ER" and "S_ _P". Those who had been asked to recall a bad deed were about 60% more likely to respond with cleansing-related words like "wash", "shower" and "soap" instead of alternatives such as "wish", "shaker" or "stop".[1]

In another experiment, experimenters were able to reduce choice-supportive bias by having subjects engage in forms of self-cleaning.[2]

The effect is apparently localized enough that those who had been asked to lie verbally preferred an oral cleaning product and those asked to lie in writing preferred a hand cleaning product over the other kind of cleanser and other control items.[3]

Other researchers have been unable to replicate the basic effect using larger samples.[4][5] Replication difficulties have emerged for three out of four of Zhong and Liljenquist's original studies (i.e., Study 2, Study 3, and Study 4).[6][better source needed] A meta-analysis of 15 studies examining the relationship between primes related to moral threat and cleansing preferences found a small effect, with no significant relationship evident across 11 studies conducted by researchers other than the original ones.[7]

See also

References

  1. 1.0 1.1 Zhong, Chen-Bo; Liljenquist, Katie (2006). "Washing Away Your Sins: Threatened Morality and Physical Cleansing". Science 313 (5792): 1451–1452. doi:10.1126/science.1130726. PMID 16960010. Bibcode2006Sci...313.1451Z. http://haniff.sg/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/washing-away-your-sins.pdf. 
  2. Lee, Spike W. S.; Schwarz, Norbert (2010). "Washing away postdecisional dissonance". Science 328 (5979): 709. doi:10.1126/science.1186799. PMID 20448177. Bibcode2010Sci...328..709L. https://semanticscholar.org/paper/a53673ec17fae0c0cc1e493e6a4b52f7ffbb53bb. 
  3. Lee, Spike W. S.; Schwarz, Norbert (2010). "Dirty Hands and Dirty Mouths: Embodiment of the Moral-Purity Metaphor Is Specific to the Motor Modality Involved in Moral Transgression". Psychological Science 21 (10): 1423–1425. doi:10.1177/0956797610382788. PMID 20817782. https://semanticscholar.org/paper/ca41aabc542e1e15ec93bb56f472389f730f1a67. 
  4. Fayard, Jennifer (2009). "Is cleanliness next to godliness? Dispelling old wives' tales: Failure to replicate Zhong and Liljenquist (2006)". Journal of Articles in Support of the Null Hypothesis 6: 21–30. http://www.jasnh.com/pdf/Vol6-No2.pdf. 
  5. Earp, Brian D.; Everett, Jim A. C.; Madva, Elizabeth N.; Hamlin, J. Kiley (2014). "Out, Damned Spot: Can the "Macbeth Effect" be Replicated?". Basic and Applied Social Psychology 36: 91–98. doi:10.1080/01973533.2013.856792. https://www.academia.edu/4336726. 
  6. "Curate Science - Crowdsourcing the Transparency of Empirical Research". http://curatescience.org/#z&l. 
  7. Siev, Jedidiah; Zuckerman, Shelby E.; Siev, Joseph J. (September 2018). "The Relationship Between Immorality and Cleansing". Social Psychology 49 (5): 303–309. doi:10.1027/1864-9335/a000349. https://curatescience.org/app/article/300.