Experimental Design
Subjects were randomly assigned to one of two conditions. Before viewing the lecture, students were give a summary of the instructors prior teaching evaluations. There were two conditions: Charismatic instructor and Punitive instructor.
Summary given in the "Charismatic instructor" condition:
Frequently at or near the top of the academic department in all teaching categories.
Professor S was always lively and stimulating in class, and commanded respect
from everyone. In class, she always encouraged students to express their ideas
and opinions, however foolish or half-baked. Professor S was always innovative.
She used differing teaching methods and frequently allowed students to experiment
and be creative. Outside the classroom, Professor S was always approachable
and treated students as individuals.
Summary given in the "Punitive instructor" condition:
Frequently near the bottom of the academic department in all important teaching
categories. Professor S did not show an interest in students' progress or make
any attempt to sustain student interest in the subject. When students asked
questions in class, they were frequently told to find the answers for themselves.
When students felt they had produced a good piece of work, very rarely were
they given positive feedback. In fact, Professor S consistently seemed to grade
students harder than other lecturers in the department.
Then all subjects watched the same twenty-minute lecture given by the exact same lecturer. Following the lecture, subjects rated the lecturer. Subjects answered three questions about the leadership qualities of the lecturer. A summary rating score was computed and used as the variable "rating" here.