Volume 4 No 1 - Journal for the Study of Antisemitism

2012] DO POLITICAL CARTOONS REFLECT ANTISEMITISM? 149
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN AND PROCEDURE
The present study employed a 2 (mortality salience: death vs. exam) x
2 (bogus pipeline: camouflage vs. bogus pipeline) x 2 (target country: Israel
vs. China) independent groups design.
Bogus pipeline. Half the subjects were made to believe that the purpose
of the experiment was simply to study a variety of attitudes (“camouflage”),
and others were made to believe that the purpose of the experiment
is to study attitudes and that any lies about their true attitudes can be
detected (“bogus pipeline”).
The participants in the camouflage condition were led to believe that
experimenters were looking for attitudes on social and political issues.
Accordingly, the cover page in the camouflage condition neither made it
very obvious that prejudice was being measured nor pointed out that questionnaires
can catch people lying. It was, therefore, a control condition.
Participants in the bogus pipeline condition received the same information
about the survey as did those in the camouflage condition, with one
crucial difference. They were also informed that the study was focused on
attitudes, but they were led to believe that any deception on their part (lying
to appear unprejudiced) would be detected by sophisticated methods developed
by psychologists. In keeping with the cover story, participants then
completed a series of personality measurements (to be used as filler
questionnaires).
Mortality salience. In the mortality salience (MS) condition, participants
responded to two open-ended questions relating to their own mortality,
which read as follows: “Please describe the emotions that the thought of
your own death arouses in you.” And, “Write down as specifically as you
can what you think will happen to you physically when you die.”
Pain salience. In the pain salience (PS) condition (control), participants
responded to parallel questions regarding thoughts of pain as follows:
“Please describe the emotions that the thought of intense physical pain
arouses in you.” And, “Write down as specifically as you can what you
think will happen to you as you experience pain and when it’s over.” Pain
salience provided an apt control condition because, as demonstrated in previous
TMT studies, thoughts of physical pain are an unpleasant as well as
anxiety-provoking, yet non-lethal, event.
PANAS-X. Given that previous TMT research demonstrated that MS
manipulations emerge after a short delay and distraction (Greenberg et al.
1994), following the MS manipulation participants completed the PANAS-
X (Watson and Clark 1992) to assess the affective consequences (or lack