In a classic study by Hastorf and Cantril (1954), undergraduates from Dartmouth and Princeton were asked to watch a film of a particularly rough football game between their two university teams. Their perceptions of the game were then analysed. Fans from Princeton were most likely to make which of the following observations about the game?
在 Hastorf 和 Cantril（1954 年）的一项经典研究中，来自达特茅斯和普林斯顿的大学生被要求观看一场两校队之间特别激烈的橄榄球比赛录像。随后对他们对比赛的感知进行了分析。来自普林斯顿的球迷最有可能对比赛做出以下哪种观察？

Question

In a classic study by Hastorf and Cantril (1954), undergraduates from Dartmouth and Princeton were asked to watch a film of a particularly rough football game between their two university teams. Their perceptions of the game were then analysed. Fans from Princeton were most likely to make which of the following observations about the game? 
在 Hastorf 和 Cantril（1954 年）的一项经典研究中，来自达特茅斯和普林斯顿的大学生被要求观看一场两校队之间特别激烈的橄榄球比赛录像。随后对他们对比赛的感知进行了分析。来自普林斯顿的球迷最有可能对比赛做出以下哪种观察？

BlackTom AI · Accepted Answer

The question describes Hastorf and Cantril's classic study in which two groups of students watched the same football game film and then reported their perceptions. We should evaluate what each option claims about Princeton fans' interpretation, keeping in mind the basic finding: observers from each group tended to view the actions of the other team as more aggressive and negative, while favoring their own team.
Option A: 'The Dartmouth players acted in self-defense against the hostile Princeton team.' This option attributes defensive behavior to Dartmouth players and frames Princeton as the aggressor. From the Princeton perspective (and from the general pattern of bias in this study), this misattributes primacy of aggression to the other side and would be inconsistent with the expectation that Princeton fans perceived their own team more favorably and the Dartmouth team as more aggressive. The statement would also imply Dartmouth acted defensively, which is less aligned with the core bias demonstrated by Princeton fans toward Dartmouth’s actions.
Option B: 'The Princeton players acted in self-defense against the hostile Dartmouth team.' This reflects the Princeton viewpoint that their players were defending themselves against Dartmouth aggression. In the Hastorf and Cantril study, each group tended to interpret the other team as the aggressor, while seeing their own team as reacting appropriately. Here, labeling Princeton players as acting in self-defense fits the idea that Princeton fans perceived their team’s actions as defensive and justified, despite similar events being interpreted differently by Dartmouth supporters.
Option C: 'The Dartmouth players showed good sportsmanship.' Framing the Dartmouth players as displaying good sportsmanship centers on a positive portrayal of Dartmouth. While fans of the other side might critique opponents, the core findings emphasize biased attributions of aggression rather than universal assessments of sportsmanship. This option shifts focus to sportsmanship quality rather than aggression, and would not specifically capture the Princeton fans’ likely observation in terms of aggressive-action interpretation.
Option D: 'The Princeton players showed poor sportsmanship.' This choice attributes negative traits to Princeton in a way that emphasizes misbehavior. If anything, the study’s pattern would more likely have Princeton fans downplaying aggressive actions by their own team and focusing on aggression from Dartmouth, rather than accusing Princeton of poor sportsmanship. It conflicts with the situational bias observed for interpreting actions through the lens of one’s own team and the opposing team’s aggression.
In summary, the Hastorf and Cantril findings describe perceptual bias where fans of one school interpret the other school as aggressors and their own team as reacting in defense or with justification. Option B best matches that pattern by attributing self-defense to Princeton players in the face of hostility from Dartmouth, whereas the other options either invert the perceived roles, emphasize sportsmanship rather than aggression, or attribute negative behavior to Princeton in a way that contradicts the typical bias demonstrated in the study.

PSYC20009_2025_SM2 Lecture 1 Quiz 讲座 1 测验

View Explanation

Log in for full answers

Similar Questions

According to social identity theory, what is in-group favoritism?

A substantial body of evidence has shown that white and black raters:

In a consumer society, many adults channel creativity into buying things

Economic stress and unpredictable times have resulted in a booming industry for self-help products

People born without creativity never can develop it

A product has a selling price of $20, a contribution margin ratio of 40% and fixed cost of $120,000. To make a profit of $30,000. The number of units that must be sold is: Type the number without $ and a comma. Eg: 20000

Which of the following statement regarding cost is correct:

More Practical Tools for Students Powered by AI Study Helper

Homework AI Solver

Stylized AI Paper Writer

Plagiarism Checker Assistant

Citation AI Academic Writing Tool

In-Class Translation Assistant

AI Note Generator

AI Quiz Answers

Past Exam Questions from University Test Bank

Smart Practice Assistant

Adaptive Practice

Making Your Study Simpler