Psychology

The study being reviewed was conducted by Maire Ford and Nancy Collins.  The study was a study using the independent variable of an ambiguous rejection of the study subject, and depending on the level of self-esteem, the expected reaction would differ, as would the level of cortisol in the subject due to the stress of the rejection.  The study not only proved its own hypothesis but it also gave credibility to those similar studies previously conducted on similar topics.  The newest aspect was the inclusion of the level of cortisol in the saliva of the subject, which is significant, but must be studied more before it can be conclusively included in the hypothesis.

Provide the reference using APA style.
Ford, M.,  Collins, N. (2010). Self-esteem moderates neuroendocrine and psychological responses to interpersonal rejection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(3), 405. doi10.1037a0017345

What is (are) the research hypothesis(es) State hypotheses explicitly so that it is apparent what was measured.

The research of Ford and Collins, hypothesized that an ambiguous rejection given to the subject will influence the psychological and endocrine responses to an ambiguous interpersonal rejection with the control being the level of self esteem (2010).  

Does (do) the hypothesis(es) follow logically from the arguments presented in the introduction Provide a short analysis of the arguments and the previous research cited in the introduction that clarifies and justifies the researchers hypothesis.

The research went further predicting that the subject with lower self-esteem (LSE) will perceive the rejection in more dangerous terms and the endocrine systems will react releasing more cortisol into the system which can lead to a more socially defensive response of the subject.  This follows with previous studies in which the subject with LSE will experience more self-doubt and expectations of rejection and thus when these events occur the result is more painful, because of the expectation is proven correct. The previous research focused more on the psychological factors, but with this current research the use of both the psychological and endocrinal system changes are explored to gain a better understanding as to how the LSE functions in contrast to the subject with high self-esteem (HSE).

What are the independent and dependent variables Be sure that you state the operational definitions of these variables.

The independent variable is the ambiguous rejection because it never changed and was always presented as being subjectively construed due to the ambiguity of the rejection response.

The control was self esteem and was nominally ordered in that it is either high or low as the difference in self-esteem will allow the ambiguous rejection to be perceived differently.

The dependent variables would the psychological responses and the endocrine levels in the system. The psychological response variable would be measured with an interval operation from low rejection response to high rejection response.  The variable associated with endocrine levels would also be interval in that the levels of cortisol would vary in the subject and should correspond to the psychological levels of response as well.

Comment on the appropriateness of the operationalization of the variables and explain why you think these variables are or are not operationalized appropriately.

I believe that the operationalization of the variables is correct.  The dependent variable related to self-esteem is correct to be operationalized as nominal since it only measured whether the subjects self esteem is high or low.  There is not ranking or intervals.  It is similar to being male or female and therefore is best understood in as a nominal operation

The remaining dependent variables will have a range of differing responses and levels.  The psychological response will go from barely registering to fearing a physical or social threat that is dangerous.  The cortisol level will move from normal to extremely high depending on the responses to the perceived rejection. In this case, the fact that there is a range of options, the interval is the best way to rate and prepare the data for analysis.

Briefly describe the research methods used in the study. How were the variables examined Is this study experimental, correlational, or descriptive (It is also possible that a study can use more than one approach to answer research questions.)

The variables were examined in a correlational and descriptive way.  The description was more on the variable of self esteem, but that variable was then correlated as to the effect of socially ambiguous rejections and the level of cortisol in the system and the psychological responses to the rejection. The way in which this study found their data was in a two session program.  The first session was an interview and the researchers used the Rosenberg Esteem Scale as one of their tools to gather the basic data for the study.  The second session was a week later and the information gathered at this session was the level of cortisol at the time the subject arrived, and after the rejection.  The other data was collected through questionnaires and observations before, during and after the rejection.

Describe the major findings as reported in the results. Do the findings support the hypothesis(es) What conclusions are made by the researcher

The psychological responses showed significant between responses before rejection and after, showing that the rejection of the unknown possible dating partner did have an effect on the subject.  The level of partner degradation was increased negatively by those subjects that had been identified as LSE.  Again there was a negative increase in the levels of cortisol in those rejected subjects identified as LSE.  With this information the findings do support the hypothesis of the study.
The conclusion is that the hypothesis proves and that subjects with LSE were more likely to self-blame for the rejection believing that the rejection was based on their unworthiness rather than on any other option.  The fact that the rejection was ambiguous allowed for this type of realization, but that was what was expected with persons with LSE.

What future research can be suggested
The weak correlation between self-blame and negative social self-evaluations, the study stated that this could be important in understanding the precise cognitions that trigger a meaningful threat to social preservation.

Also there needs to be more studies on the effect of cortisol level in subjects based on relationship events.  This study only gave a basis on which to develop other studies that are more in-depth and focus more on the reasons why the levels change and what triggers the increase.

Discuss the strengths and weaknesses of this research If possible, describe at least one minor or major flaw of this research.

One weakness found was the scales for self-blame and negative self evaluations and the implications that need to be further explored.  Another factor was that self-blame was correlated with partner degradation but the self-evaluation was not, again leaving room for more study to gain better understandings as how the individual cognition works.

The strength of this study was that it backs up previous studies showing that the level of self-esteem reacts with the ambiguous rejection and therefore expected responses occur.

What contributions did this particular study make Why should we care about this research, as psychological scientists or as consumers or psychological research

This study gave more in-depth proof of the correlation of LSE and the response of social threats as dangerous to the social worth of an individual.  This type of research helps to better understand and work with risk regulations in relationships.