SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY LAB REPORT

Running head: EFFECT OF PRIDE FOR SELF AND TEAM ON PRO-SOCIALITY

1
The Effect of Pride for the Self and Pride for a Team on Pro-Social Behaviors
Saumya Sudhir, Selime Salim, Raabia Malik
Mount Holyoke College


2
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine whether there was a difference in pro-social
behavior when participants were induced with the emotion of pride for self or pride for a
team. We hypothesized that people who wrote about a time they felt proud of their team
would donate more money to the charity called Safe Passage than the people who wrote
about a time that they felt proud of themselves. We recruited 60 Mount Holyoke College
students for the study, and 30 were placed in each experimental condition. Participants
were asked to complete an emotion-induction writing task asking about a time they felt
proud of themselves or a team. They were given $4 for their participation in the study,
and were given the option to donate to charity. The independent samples t-test conducted
did not yield significant results, thereby not supporting our hypothesis that there is a
difference between pride for self and pride for team in donating to charity. However, in
an exploratory analysis, we conducted a two-way ANOVA, and found a significant
interaction effect between the condition and residency status (p = 0.033). It was thus
determined that international students in the team condition donated more money to the
charity than the domestic students in this condition. On the other hand, the domestic
students in the self condition donated more money than the international students in this
condition. Possible explanations for these findings are discussed.


3
Introduction
Pride is a fascinating and multifaceted emotion. The Oxford English Dictionary
defines it as “a feeling or deep pleasure or satisfaction derived from one’s own
achievements, the achievements of those with whom one is closely associated, or from
qualities or possessions that are widely admired” (2016). There is no one cause: pride can
be brought about by a hard-earned victory (authentic pride), joy at someone else’s
success, or even conceit and arrogance (hubristic pride). For instance, pride is evident in
Usain Bolt’s outstretched arms after he crosses the finish line first, in Leonardo DiCaprio
fans’ exhilarated memes following his Oscar win, and also in Donald Trump’s self-
assured smile and thumbs up at the Iowa Caucus. Pride is also interesting in its various
consequences. It can motivate people to accomplish their goals, cause them to consider
their point of view superior to that of others, and even result in intense emotional
expressions – as any teary parent at a college graduation would confirm.
Equally fascinating is pro-social behavior, which is defined by the Oxford English
Dictionary as “behavior that is positive, helpful, and intended to promote social
acceptance and friendship” (2016). There is immense value in pro-social behavior,
largely because it is implicated in the survival, sustenance, and reproduction of species.
Giving to charity, for example, can empower people in need and provide them with the
resources they require to improve their lives. They can then contribute to society,
possibly by providing their services in a work environment. This in turn enhances the
quality of life for other individuals. Given the importance of pro-social behavior,
psychologists have for decades worked towards gaining an insight into its antecedents, in
order to encourage and induce pro-sociality in people.


4
Because emotions are linked to behaviors, it is natural that they are often studied
in conjunction with each other. Pride and pro-social behavior are no exception;
researchers have tried to formally study the relationship between the two for years. For
instance, it has been shown that the perceptions of a person’s pro-sociality are influenced
by the pride that person is experiencing. One study demonstrated that pride is not
perceived to be associated with pro-social behavior (Wubben, De Cremer, & van Dijk,
2012). Participants used a computer software to play a game in which several players
pooled money, and the more money that one participant would withdraw, the less there
would remain to be divided among the remaining members. The subjects were told that a
member would take some amount of the money and then choose an image to represent
their current emotion – anger, surprise, fear, sadness, shame, happiness, pride, or a
neutral expression. The subjects were shown the image selected by the member taking the
money, and were asked to guess how much money this person had taken from the
common fund. Participants in the pride condition were then asked to answer questions
about how much money the person would have taken if they had chosen the proud
expression; in the neutral condition, participants indicated the amount of donated by
members who had chosen the neutral expression. It was found that participants believed
that the proud person had taken more money, (thereby maximizing their own benefits)
significantly more than did the neutral person. Thus, it can be inferred from this
experiment that pride is seen to be associated with self-interested – not pro-social –
behavior.
Relatedly, one study found that observers rated targets (in photographs) that
appeared proud as displaying significantly greater self-interest than those who seemed


5
neutral or joyful (Horberg, Kraus, & Keltner, 2013). Hence, a person’s authentic pride
appears to influence others’ perceptions of their pro-sociality and self-interested
behavior.
Another study, however, shows that there are distinctions between the various
types of pride when it comes to influencing pro-social behavior. One study explored the
relationship between peer-rated authentic pride and altruism and helpfulness (Cheng,
Tracy, & Heinrich, 2010). The study recruited participants from varsity athletic teams,
who rated their peers on dominance and prestige (which were shown to correlate highly
with hubristic and authentic pride respectively on the Hubristic and Authentic Pride-
Proneness scales). Their ratings of their peers on these two traits were then correlated
with the ratings of their peers’ other abilities (such advice-giving, social skills,
cooperativeness, morality, and leaderships). It was found that there was a significant
correlation between the peer-ratings of prestige, and by extension, authentic pride, and of
altruism and helpfulness. This indicates that pride is associated with positive and, more
specifically, pro-social characteristics.
Past studies have also shown that actual behavior is influenced by pride. In one
study, the inducement of pride as found to increase the specific pro-social behavior of
cooperation. Here, subjects were divided into three conditions, and were asked to
describe an event that would make them feel proud; were asked to describe an event that
would make them feel joyful; or were not asked to describe any event at all (Dorfman,
Eyal, & Bereby-Meyer, 2014). They then played a fishing game that counted how many
fish they had “put back in the lake.” This amount indicated their level of cooperation, as
the more fish they returned to the lake, the more other people could benefit. It was found


6
that subjects in the pride condition cooperated significantly more than those in the joy
and control conditions. This suggests that the inducement of pride enhances cooperation.
These past studies have no doubt been valuable in informing our understanding of
the effect of pride on pro-sociality. While some studies have shown that pride as a whole
is associated with self-interested behavior, others have differentiated between authentic
and hubristic pride in their influence on pro-sociality: individuals exhibiting authentic
pride are perceived to display more cooperation, altruism, and helpfulness and less self-
interest than those experiencing hubristic pride. Previous research has also shown that
pride is not only perceived to influence people’s pro-social behavior, but actually does
influence it. The feeling of pride has been shown to lead to greater cooperation than do
other emotions. The differences in the pro-sociality associated with various forms of
pride suggest that it is not possible to generalize across the emotion of pride. Clearly,
there exist distinct categories of pride, and they have been seen to lead to differing levels
of pro-social behavior.
However, there are gaps in the research regarding the effect of other forms of
pride – most notably, self-focused and team-focused pride, on actual behavior. As we
have seen, pride for oneself is often associated with arrogance, a heightened sense of self-
importance, and a lack of concern for others. Pride for a team, on the other hand, tends to
encourage communal values and mutual cooperation, and may be linked to a greater
concern for others as well as an increased willingness to help them. Due to the possibility
that the various types of pride may result in different levels of pro-sociality, it is
important to examine them in a laboratory setting.


7
Additionally, the existing research also overlooks the specific pro-social behavior
of donating to charity. Because of the income inequality and poverty that abound in most
modern societies, monetary donations are crucial for the advancement of many sections
of society. Thus, it is imperative that we examine the various motivations behind
donating money. The goal of the current investigation is to build upon the previous
research on pride and pro-sociality, and compare the effects of pride for the self and pride
for a team on charitable donations.
Our study aims to address these shortcomings of previous research by inducing
the feeling of pride for the self or pride for the team in participants, and measuring the
amount of money they donate to charity. The independent variable is the nature of pride
induced in participants. We operationally define experiencing pride for the self as
responding to a writing prompt asking about the pride felt by the participant after having
accomplished something on his or her own. Experiencing pride for the team is
operationally defined as writing about the pride resulted from a feat accomplished when
they were part of a team. The dependent variable, pro-social behavior, is measured
through the amount donated by the participant to charity out of the $4 of compensation
they received for their participation in the study.
This study is especially significant because it requires participants to make real-
life decisions about behaving in a pro-social way. This is in contrast to previous research
that examined third-party ratings of pride and pro-social behavior (for instance, studies
involving the evaluation of the pride felt by another person, and their consequent pro-
social behavior). In doing so, it can delve deeper into the decisions that human beings
make when their own interests are involved. Our study narrows the focus of past research


8
by distinguishing between pride directed toward the self and a team, and by studying
their effects on a specific pro-social behavior, giving to charity.
We hypothesized that participants who were led to experience feelings of pride
for a team would donate a significantly higher mean amount of money to charity than
participants who were led to experience pride for themselves. This is because they would
have been primed with the memory of a situation in which other people’s actions and
efforts were important to the success of their team. They would thus have been more
likely to think about the value of individual contributions to positive outcomes, and may
have recognized their own role in improving other people’s situations through a
charitable donation, and thus may have donated more. Participants who experienced self-
focused pride, on the other hand, may have been primed to think about their own skills
and abilities, and may have chosen the self-interested behavior of keeping more (or all) of
the money, and thus may have donated less.
Method
Participants
Sixty Mount Holyoke College students were recruited and randomly assigned to
one of the two conditions, pride for the self and pride for the team. Of our 60 participants,
32 were international and 27 were domestic. One participant selected both the domestic
and international options, and so her data was excluded from our exploratory analysis.
There were 30 participants in the pride for self condition and 30 participants in the pride
for team condition. Thirty-eight participants identified as Asian, 14 as White, two as
Black, and two as Arab. Four participants identified as multi-racial. Eight participants
were first-years, 18 were sophomores, 19 were juniors, and 15 were seniors.


9
Procedure
The researcher approached a participant who was alone, and asked if they would
like to participate in a short study about writing and reading. If they agreed, they were
presented with an informed consent form, which explained that the purpose of the study
was to see how people engage with writing and reading tasks. It also explained that their
participation was voluntary, that they could withdraw from the study at any time without
any penalty, and that their responses would be entirely confidential and would not be
traced back to their name. They were told to read and sign the form when ready. The
participant was then handed a large envelope and asked to read the instructions at the top
of the first task. There were two separate types of instructions for the two separate
conditions. Thirty participants received the writing prompt for the pride for self condition
(“Write about a time when you felt proud of something you achieved on your own”), and
the other 30 received the writing prompt for the pride for team condition (“Write about a
time when you felt proud of something your team achieved”). When they were ready,
they were given four minutes to complete the task. Once they were done with the writing
task, they were asked to turn to the word search task on the next page, and were given
two minutes to find as many words as possible. All 60 participants received the same
filler task – a simple word search task with the neutral theme of office supplies. The
participant was asked to provide their email on a separate log sheet in order to receive the
debriefing form following data collection. They were then given $4. They were told that
they could choose to donate some of the money to the charity Safe Passage by placing am
amount of their choice (if they chose to donate at all) in the large envelope. In the
meantime, the researcher turned their back to the participant and retrieved a demographic


10
questionnaire asking for the participant’s age, race, Major and Minor, and whether they
were a domestic or international student. The participant was handed the demographic
questionnaire and asked to place it with their completed task in the envelope after filling
out the details. The study was concluded and the participant was thanked for their time.
Results
An independent samples t-test was conducted to evaluate whether there were differences
between the effects of pride for self and pride for team on pro-social behavior at Mount
Holyoke College. The dependent variable was the amount of money donated to a charity
(ranging from zero to four dollars). There was no statistically significant difference
between the two experimental conditions, t(58) = -.418, p = 0.677. There was also no
significant difference between the mean amounts donated by international and domestic
students, t(57) = -.200, p = 0.842, nor was there a significant difference among the mean
amounts donated by participants from different racial backgrounds F(4,55) = 1.357, p =
0.261. An exploratory analysis was conducted to see if there was an interaction between
the type of pride (self versus team) and residency status (international versus domestic) in
the amount of money donated. There was a significant interaction effect between type of
pride and residency status F(1,55) = 4.802, p = 0.033. As displayed in Figure 1, domestic
students in the self condition donated significantly more money (M = 2.56, SD = 1.632)
than international students in the self condition (M = 1.46, SD = 1.808). On the other
hand, international students in the team condition donated significantly more money (M =
2.53, SD = 1.744) than domestic students in the team condition (M = 1.64, SD = 1.629).
Therefore, the data suggest that international students show more pro-social behaviors


11
when they are induced to feel pride for a team, whereas domestic students show more
pro-social behaviors when they are induced to feel pride for themselves.

Figure 1. Mean amount of money donated by domestic and international students in pride for self and pride
for team conditions.
Discussion
The results of this study indicate that pride for the self and pride for a team result
in similar levels of pro-social behavior. These results do not support our hypothesis that
pride for a team causes individuals to be more pro-social (in this case, donating more
money to charity) than does pride for the self.
However, while the type of pride was not found to have an impact on pro-
sociality on its own, it did interact with the participants’ residency status to influence pro-
social behavior. In our study, international students experiencing pride for a team
behaved more pro-socially than international students experiencing pride for the self.
Conversely, domestic students experiencing pride for the self behaved more pro-socially
than domestic students experiencing pride for a team.
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
Pride for Self Pride for Team
Money Donated ($)
Domestic International


12
One way to frame our understanding of these results is to consider differences
between collectivistic and individualistic cultures. Western cultures have been found to
emphasize individualism and independence, and members of these societies value
individual freedom and personal choice (Markus, 2001; Morling & Lamoureaux, 2008).
Further, they consider self-esteem to be stable, personal, and enhanced by success (Heine
et al., 2001; White & Lehman, 2005). From this, it follows that our domestic participants
in the self condition (who may have automatically been more receptive to individualistic
expressions of pride) may have experienced a stronger feeling of self-focused pride than
the international students in this condition. They may have consequently experienced an
enhancement of related emotions such as self-efficacy and self-esteem. Feeling confident
and able, the domestic students may have seen themselves as responsible for helping
others. This would have led them to donate more in the self condition than the team
condition.
The cultures of Asia (the place of origin of most of our international participants)
emphasize collectivistic values and view social phenomena more holistically than their
Western counterparts. Emphasis is placed on communal traditions and interdependence,
and people’s identities are considered interconnected (Choi & Choi, 2002; Markus &
Kitayama, 1991). Moreover, self-concept in Asian cultures is more fluid than in Western
cultures (Tafarodi et al., 2004). Thus, our international participants in the team condition
may have been inherently more receptive to pride for a community or team, and thus
would likely have experienced a greater feeling of team-focused pride than their domestic
counterparts. This may have induced associated emotions such as cooperation, mutual
respect, and appreciation for the role of individual efforts in achieving broader objectives.


13
With this communalistic orientation, the international students may have felt that it was
their duty to help other members of society, leading them to donate more to charity in the
team condition than domestic students in the same condition.
Another way to interpret this data is to look at the experiences of international
students in general. It is possible that because international students are far away from
their home countries, they frequently seek out communities and close social groups. This
may prime them towards collectivistic values, regardless of their region of origin. The
international students in our sample may thus have been influenced more strongly by
pride for their team in the team condition than domestic students, and hence, they donated
more when they experienced team-focused pride. Domestic students, on the other hand,
may have set out for college with a desire to establish their own identities, and may see
college as an opportunity to concentrate on self-directed activities and beliefs. This may
have led them to be influenced more strongly by the self condition, leading them to
donate more when experiencing self-focused pride. These areas of speculation into
collectivistic and individualistic societies, as well as the international student psyche, are
fertile ground for future research.
There are some tentative explanations for the nonsignificance of the results
linking the type of pride induced in participants and the extent of pro-sociality they
displayed. Although past research has examined the difference between the pro-sociality
associated with authentic and hubristic pride, our results indicated that the various
categories of pride (in our case, self-focused and team-focused) may not necessarily
result in different expressions of pro-sociality. There are a few possible reasons why we
may have obtained these results.


14
For one, this study primarily recruited college-aged students identifying as
women and studying at a prestigious private liberal arts institution. One could surmise
that the participants’ commonalities in age, gender identity, and education level led them
to respond in a similar manner. Moreover, the influence of our specific charity may have
overpowered that of the independent variable, pride. Our study involved the charity Safe
Passage, which supports victims of domestic abuse. Since our sample was drawn from
students at a women’s college, and there is a widespread notion that women are the main
victims of domestic abuse, it may be that our participants were naturally more inclined to
donate to this charity that they associate with women, and that this concern for women’s
issues superseded their feeling of pride when it came to influencing how much they
donated.
Although our initial hypotheses were not supported, this study contributes
valuable knowledge to the fields of pride and pro-social behavior. This study is rare in
that it links the various types of pride (self-focused and team-focused) with the residency
status of participants (domestic or international). While previous studies have focused
individually on American, Japanese, Chinese, Korean, and other cultures, this study
examines pro-sociality and pride across cultures to arrive at an understanding of the
differences between them. In addition, this study is the first to assess pro-sociality using
actual money. Past studies have largely employed virtual reality tasks on computers
instead of tasks with real-life consequences, meaning that participants would have had to
make hypothetical rather than actual decisions about how pro-socially they would
behave. Our study put subjects in a situation where they had to make decisions about pro-
social behaviors that would affect them directly. This was done to ensure that subjects


15
behaved authentically, which would enable us to draw conclusions that are as applicable
to external situations as possible.
Although this study led to interesting results, there were certainly a few
limitations. To begin with, time restrictions made it difficult to administer a manipulation
check, as participants had to complete two activities in addition to various forms, and the
study was as it is approximately 10 minutes long. Due to the absence of this manipulation
check, it was difficult for us to ascertain whether the participants actually experienced the
emotions we attempted to induce (pride for the self and pride for a team). Had we been
able to test for this emotion induction, we would have employed Likert-scale questions,
(e.g. “How proud do you feel at this moment?” “How proud of yourself do you feel at
this moment?” “How proud of a team do you feel at this moment?” “How pro-social do
you feel at this moment?” etc.) – in order to eliminate the responses of participants who
had not actually experienced the intended emotion. This would have enhanced the
accuracy of our results.
Moreover, there was no neutral condition in our study with which to compare the
pro-sociality displayed by participants experiencing pride for the self and pride for the
team. It is possible that pride does not in fact have an influence on the pro-social behavior
of money donation, or that pride elicits pro-sociality regardless of its type (whether self-
focused or team-focused). Thus, the use of a neutral condition with a writing prompt such
as “Write about a time when you visited a supermarket” may have been helpful when
trying to asses if there were significant differences among the two pride conditions and
the neutral condition.


16
In the future, research on this topic could address these limitations, by
incorporating manipulation checks, gathering data on the financial background of
participants, and including a neutral condition. Future research could also expand the
scope of this study by addressing related topics and diverse demographics. For one, the
study could assess forms of pro-social behavior other than monetary aid. This could take
the form of the researcher (or a confederate) ‘accidentally’ dropping some pens at the end
of the study, and making a note of whether the participant helped pick up the pens.
Recording both the amount of money donated and the extent of helping behavior could
result in a more holistic measure of pro-sociality. (Note: it would be more convenient to
use sheets of paper for this exercise, but a participant may not help pick up sheets of
paper as they may assume that the papers contain private information, and may want to
respect the confidentiality of the experiment.)
It may also be interesting to explore whether the type of charity has an influence
on the amount of money donated. For instance, whether a charity is devoted to a
collectivistic or individualistic cause may influence participants differently on the basis
of the condition in which they are placed. For example, a participant experiencing pride
for a team may donate more to causes involving collective action by a group of people,
for a group of people, (such as Habitat for Humanity) than those involving individual
benefits (such as funding for medical research).
Additionally, the relevancy of the charity may influence the strength of the
manipulation. There is a possibility that issues that are less commonly faced by people
may elicit a less emotional response from participants, making them more likely to be
influenced by the type of pride when deciding how much to donate, if they are to donate


17
at all. One example of an issue that may be less personally relevant to most people is a
rare and mild disease; when considering donating for research into this cause, participants
in the self condition may donate less money, because in addition to their distance from
the cause, they would experience more self-centered emotions than those in the team
condition.
Expanding the sample to include a wider array of demographics may also lead to
interesting results. For example, it is likely that participants in the age bracket of 35-45
years may be more influenced by team-focused pride than would college-aged
individuals. This is because, by the time people reach their mid-30s, they have often
finalized their careers and settled into family life. Due to their constant interactions with
colleagues and relatives, they may be attuned to working with others and may be more
sensitive to the needs and emotions of groups of people. Thus, they may donate more
after having experienced team-focused pride.
Another possibility is to expand the sample to include individuals from various
professions. People are likely to be influenced by the environment of a workplace in
which they spend large amounts of time daily, and differences in the amount of team
work in their job may influence them more than the type of pride induced during the
study. For instance, people working in collaborative environments (team sports, theatrical
troupes, production crews, event planning, etc.) may be less influenced by pride for the
self and may donate a relatively large amount of money regardless of the condition in
which they are placed. On the other hand, people working in individualistic positions
(such as one-on-one sports, freelancing, writing, etc.) may be less influenced by pride for


18
a team, and may donate a relatively small amount of money regardless of the condition in
which they are placed.
Thus, it can be seen that there was no significant difference between the extent of
pro-sociality displayed (more specifically, the amount donated to charity) by participants
who experienced pride for the self and those who experienced pride for a team. There
was, however, a significant interaction between residency status and the type of pride
induced in participants: domestic students donated more in the self condition than the
team condition, and international students donated more in the team condition than the
self condition. From these findings, one can surmise that while different types of pride
may not singularly influence pro-social behavior, they do have an impact when they are
combined with nationality. In today’s world, rapid globalization and the migrant crisis are
making the elimination of racist and xenophobic beliefs all the more important. Since
social issues are best combated with social factors, it is crucial for us to develop a deeper
understanding into the specific aspects of pride that influence pro-social behavior.


19
References
Cheng, J. T., Tracy, J. L., & Henrich, J. (2010). Pride, personality, and the evolutionary
foundations of human social status. Evolution And Human Behavior, 31(5), 334-
347. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2010.02.004
Choi, I., & Choi, Y. (2002). Culture and self-concept flexibility. Personality & Social
Psychology Bulletin, 18, 1508-1517.
Dorfman, A., Eyal, T., & Bereby-Meyer, Y. (2014). Proud to cooperate: The
consideration of pride promotes cooperation in a social dilemma. Journal Of
Experimental Social Psychology, 55105-109. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2014.06.003
Heine, S. J., Kitayama, S., Lehman, D. R., Takata, T., Ide, E., Leung, C., & Matsumoto,
H. (2001). Divergent consequences of success and failure in Japan and North
America: An investigation of self-improving motivations and malleable selves.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 1268-1283.
Horberg, E. J., Kraus, M. W., & Keltner, D. (2013). Pride displays communicate self-
interest and support for meritocracy. Journal Of Personality And Social
Psychology, 105(1), 24-37. doi:10.1037/a0032849
Markus, H. (2001, October 7). Culture and the good life. Address to the Positive
Psychology Summit conference, Washington DC.
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition,
emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224-253.
Morling, B., & Lamoreaux, M. (2008). Measuring culture outside the head: A meta-
analysis of individualism-collectivism in cultural products. Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, 12, 199-221


20
Pride [Def 1]. (n.d.). In Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary Online. Retrieved April
17, 2016, from
https://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/pride
Prosocial. (n.d.). In Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary Online. Retrieved April 17,
2016, from
https://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/prosocial
Tafarodi, R. W., Lo, C., Yamaguchi, S., Lee, W. W-S., & Katsura, H. (2004). The inner
self in three countries. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 35, 97-117.
Tracy, J. L., & Robins, R. W. (2007a). The psychological structure of pride: A tale of two
facets. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 506525.
White, K., & Lehman, D. R. (2005). Culture and social comparison seeking: The role of
self-motives. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 232, 242.
Williams, L. A., & DeSteno, D. (2008). Pride and perseverance: The motivational role of
pride. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 10071017
Wubben, M. J., De Cremer, D., & van Dijk, E. (2012). Is pride a prosocial emotion?
Interpersonal effects of authentic and hubristic pride. Cognition And
Emotion, 26(6), 1084-1097. doi:10.1080/02699931.2011.646956

SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY LAB REPORT

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

Destacado

Destacado (15)

Similar a SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY LAB REPORT

Similar a SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY LAB REPORT (20)

SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY LAB REPORT