Discussion

The
aim of this research was to find how the participants initially made the
association between their action and the confidence in the power of
superstition. The primary objective of this general topic of superstition was
to find how people who depend on a superstition behaviour make the association
between their behaviour and the belief of superstition. The participants that
took part in our research had to create a connection with the superstitious
behaviour based through one good performance with their superstition belief and
through one “poor” performance without using their superstition belief. These
participants were depending on their superstitious attitude during the task
that they were asked to complete, however, their faith in the component of luck
was not built up until their first execution without their superstitious
behaviour. After they performed ineffectively, these members ascribed their
poor execution to their missing superstitious behaviour in that occasion.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

            The association made between their
belief “in luck” and their behaviour fits the explanations of superstition of
Beck & Forstmeier. Their research of Superstition
and Belief as Inevitable By-products of an Adaptive Learning Strategy,
states that humans use causal thinking in order to explain their surrounding
world, which is also connected with the attribution theory of Weiner. Ok, it is
good that you refer to beck and forstmeier. Nevertheless, normally you don’t
refer to literature anymore in your discussion section. You leave this to your
introduction. Since your introduction is rather short, I would definitely
advice you to copy this part to the result section. You can come back to it
here later. It is as yet obscure how or why each participant made the
association of superstition and his/her behaviour at a different outcome of
either success/ or failure. Since our results were not significant enough to
provide a clear image of superstition, one possible solution to the connection
of successful/failure performances with superstition would be to increase the
sample. Perhaps by adding more participants to our experiment, a clearer
connection would be identified. And what about giving them more throwing
opportunities?

            Moreover, another factor that played
a role in the significance of our results is how the people that took part in
the experiment decided when and if a particular object or behaviour was
significant enough to perform according to our research, in the task of
throwing the “lucky” ball into the bucket. In our case, just asking if the
participants believe in luck, seems very vague to actually succeed in such
task, because although people might believe in superstition, they might have
different ways of interpreting it. And couldn’t be people who don’t believe in
luck also be ‘primed’ or ‘convinced’ by the fact that they were using a lucky
ball? Do they have to believe in luck perse? People might have a ritualistic attitude
towards a task (praying) or people might have objects for their superstition as
in the experiment of Damisch et al. (2010), where people should bring their own
lucky charm. If this is the case, what could you have changed in your
experiment? Adding more questions? Moreover, people have definite rules to
“activate” their superstitious behaviour. These rules were created and
understood by the individual for the individual. These standards were specific
to every person. This factor, led to a portion of subcategories of ambiguity
around their opinion of believing in superstition. Especially, when they were
questioned, if they believed or followed a specific superstitious action, as it
was in our case. In our current study, surprisingly, various participants
questioned their belief in the power of superstition and the connection to
their behaviour, however they still continued the task. (When failed to succeed
with the lucky ball, “It seems that I don’t have luck”). A limitation to our
study can be seen though the sample size. If there was an increase in the
sample of the participants, it may have resulted in a more significant
correlation of superstitious behaviour and the success of the throwing of the
ball. Moreover, other limitation/ recommendation for further research is to
increase the difficulty of the tasks or increase the number of times which
participants are asked to throw the balls. 

x

Hi!
I'm Erica!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out