What were the findings of this study? What was the hypothesis? The current study was designed to measure EoMQ (Fear of Missing out)in participants when they read that they will be the only ones not attending a social event whileall their friends can attend. Three conditions described which friends were going to the concert:all, none, and some. In general, we predicted that if participants imagined they were the onlyperson unable to attend an event while all other social media friends could attend then, theywould experience higher EoMO, feelings than when either none or some of their social mediafriends were able to attend, with no differences in EMO feelings emerging between conditionswhere either none or only some other social media friends were able to attend. More specifically,we predicted that if participants imagined they were the only person unable to attend an eventwhile all other social media friends FOMO ANALYSIS 7 could attend, then they would feelmore frustrated and more likely to feel like they were missing out than participants who read thatnone or only some other social media friends were able to attend.ParticipantsFor our second study, 209 individuals participated in the study. The two-hundred and nineparticipants comprised of 39.7% (n=83) males, 58.4% (n = 122), 0.5% (n = 1) other, and 1.4%(n = 3) who did not specify their gender. The ages from our study ranged from a minimum of 15to a maximum of 55 years old (M= 23.44, SD = 8.41). The sample population comprised of73.7% Hispanic (n = 154), 10.0 % Caucasian (n=21), 6.2% African American (n = 13), 0.5%Native American (n = 1), 3.3 % Asian American (n = 7), 4.8 % reporting "Other" (n = 10), and1.4% (n = 3) who did not specify. Note that two participants did not provide any materials.Procedure and MaterialsIn relation to the uniform standards for informed consent, potential participants were asked if heor she is willing to participate in an online study. Additionally disclosing if there were any risksto the participants in this study. If potential participants agreed to continue then the researchmaterials were presented to the potential participants through Qualtrics software. Onceparticipants agreed to participate in the study, they were permitted to the entire survey whichincludes five sections. Participants were randomly assigned to four conditions: All Can Attendand Limited Tickets, All Can Attend and Unlimited Tickets, None Can Attend and UnlimitedTickets, and the last condition was None Can Attend and Limited Tickets. Similar to study One,participants were asked to look at a Facebook Home Page for Ben Addams and read the initialpost and the responses from his friends. Participants were asked to imagine that they providedthe last response. The Facebook Home Page consisted of Ben FOMO ANALYSIS 22 Addams'last post and under his post are five friends, Lisa Nichols, Erika Siu, Carlos Herrera, Ari Anaz.and a "YOUR RESPONSE" that participants imaged they posted themselves. Parallel to studyone, all the responses consisted of the same wording including the "YOUR RESPONSE". Allparticipants read the same post from Ben that said, "Hey everyone! I've got great news. I knewwe're all thrilled that the Covid Quarantine is over and life is final back to normal. But REALnormal means ENTERTAINMENT IS BACK! Yep, that's right. Remember that night our wehad scheduled for fall, 2020 until it got cancelled? Well, I just got an alert that he's back in townand he's ready to ENTERTAIN! You know who I mean (and if you don't know who, then you'reno friend of mine!). I need to book tickets ASAP." But the last few sentences differed acrossconditions. In the "Limited" Condition the last few sentences stated "It is already nearly sold outalready, and I can only get 6 tickets. I'm one of them, so that leaves just 5 left for you guys. Letme know ASAP everyone! Tickets are limited!" In the "Unlimited" Condition the last fewsentences stated "It is a huge place, so there are tons of tickets, and I can get as many as I want.I'm getting mine, so let me know how many I need to get for you guys. Let me know ASAPeveryone! Tickets are unlimited!" Participants assigned to the "All Can Attend and LimitedTickets" Condition read Ben's Facebook post that highlighted that they were only 5 ticketsavailable. Beneath Ben's post were the same responses from his friends as in study one statingall friends will attend the event. Whereas participants assigned to the "None Can Attend andUnlimited Tickets" Condition, saw the same post from Ben but the difference was the responsesfrom Ben's friends. In this condition, everyone replied under Ben's Facebook post stating thatthey cannot attend the event. FOMO ANALYSIS 23 Participants randomly assigned to the "AllCan Attend and Unlimited Tickets" Condition read Ben's Facebook post that highlightedunlimited tickets. Under the post were responses from all Ben's friends replying that they will allattend the event. Whereas participants randomly assigned to the "None Can Attend andUnlimited Tickets" Condition saw the same post from Ben but the aspect that differs in thisscenario is the responses from Ben's friends. In this condition, all of Ben's friends replied statingthat they cannot attend the event.ResultsOur second survey conditions, attendance (All and None) served as our independent variable andthe recall of how many tickets were available served our dependent variable. With thisinformation, we ran a manipulation check which revealed a significant effect, X 2 (1) 103.24, p .05. There wereno meaningful differences between limited tickets (M = 3.69, SD = 1.40) and unlimited tickets(M = 3.92, SD = 1.33). There was also no main effect for attendance, E(1, 203) = 1.82, p.05.There was no significant difference between all attending (M = 3.92, SD = 1.40) and noneattending (M = 3.67, SD = 1.33). There was no significant interaction, E(1, 203) = 0.78, p = .379.This indicates that participants did not differ in their assessments of whether they would feelfrustrated when all attended and limited tickets available (M = 3.74, SD = 1.48), none 29 canattend and limited tickets available (M = 3.65, SD = 1.32), all attended and unlimited ticketsavailable (M = 4.12, SD = 1.29), or when none attended and limited tickets available (M = 3.70,SD = 1.35) We ran another 2 X 2 factorial ANOVA with tickets (Limited or Unlimited) andattendance (All or None) as our independent variable and "I would feel like I was missing out"as our dependent variable. There was no main effect for tickets EL1, 203) = 0.00, p .05. Therewere no meaningful differences between limited tickets (M=4.13, SD = 1.47) and unlimitedtickets (M = 4.14, SD = 1.57). However, there was a significant main effect for attendance, E1,203) = 10.66, p .05. Thus, there were no differences in participants feeling of missing out between allcan attend and limited tickets (M = 4.35, SD = 1.53), none can attend and limited tickets (M =3.89, SD = 1.37), all can attend and unlimited tickets (M=4.56, SD = 1.46)) and none can attendand unlimited tickets (M = 3.67, SD = 1.46).

Question

What were the findings of this study? What was the hypothesis? The current study was designed to measure EoMQ (Fear of Missing out)in participants when they read that they will be the only ones not attending a social event whileall their friends can attend. Three conditions described which friends were going to the concert:all, none, and some. In general, we predicted that if participants imagined they were the onlyperson unable to attend an event while all other social media friends could attend then, theywould experience higher EoMO, feelings than when either none or some of their social mediafriends were able to attend, with no differences in EMO feelings emerging between conditionswhere either none or only some other social media friends were able to attend. More specifically,we predicted that if participants imagined they were the only person unable to attend an eventwhile all other social media friends FOMO ANALYSIS 7 could attend, then they would feelmore frustrated and more likely to feel like they were missing out than participants who read thatnone or only some other social media friends were able to attend.ParticipantsFor our second study, 209 individuals participated in the study. The two-hundred and nineparticipants comprised of 39.7% (n=83) males, 58.4% (n = 122), 0.5% (n = 1) other, and 1.4%(n = 3) who did not specify their gender. The ages from our study ranged from a minimum of 15to a maximum of 55 years old (M= 23.44, SD = 8.41). The sample population comprised of73.7% Hispanic (n = 154), 10.0 % Caucasian (n=21), 6.2% African American (n = 13), 0.5%Native American (n = 1), 3.3 % Asian American (n = 7), 4.8 % reporting "Other" (n = 10), and1.4% (n = 3) who did not specify. Note that two participants did not provide any materials.Procedure and MaterialsIn relation to the uniform standards for informed consent, potential participants were asked if heor she is willing to participate in an online study. Additionally disclosing if there were any risksto the participants in this study. If potential participants agreed to continue then the researchmaterials were presented to the potential participants through Qualtrics software. Onceparticipants agreed to participate in the study, they were permitted to the entire survey whichincludes five sections. Participants were randomly assigned to four conditions: All Can Attendand Limited Tickets, All Can Attend and Unlimited Tickets, None Can Attend and UnlimitedTickets, and the last condition was None Can Attend and Limited Tickets. Similar to study One,participants were asked to look at a Facebook Home Page for Ben Addams and read the initialpost and the responses from his friends. Participants were asked to imagine that they providedthe last response. The Facebook Home Page consisted of Ben FOMO ANALYSIS 22 Addams'last post and under his post are five friends, Lisa Nichols, Erika Siu, Carlos Herrera, Ari Anaz.and a "YOUR RESPONSE" that participants imaged they posted themselves. Parallel to studyone, all the responses consisted of the same wording including the "YOUR RESPONSE". Allparticipants read the same post from Ben that said, "Hey everyone! I've got great news. I knewwe're all thrilled that the Covid Quarantine is over and life is final back to normal. But REALnormal means ENTERTAINMENT IS BACK! Yep, that's right. Remember that night our wehad scheduled for fall, 2020 until it got cancelled? Well, I just got an alert that he's back in townand he's ready to ENTERTAIN! You know who I mean (and if you don't know who, then you'reno friend of mine!). I need to book tickets ASAP." But the last few sentences differed acrossconditions. In the "Limited" Condition the last few sentences stated "It is already nearly sold outalready, and I can only get 6 tickets. I'm one of them, so that leaves just 5 left for you guys. Letme know ASAP everyone! Tickets are limited!" In the "Unlimited" Condition the last fewsentences stated "It is a huge place, so there are tons of tickets, and I can get as many as I want.I'm getting mine, so let me know how many I need to get for you guys. Let me know ASAPeveryone! Tickets are unlimited!" Participants assigned to the "All Can Attend and LimitedTickets" Condition read Ben's Facebook post that highlighted that they were only 5 ticketsavailable. Beneath Ben's post were the same responses from his friends as in study one statingall friends will attend the event. Whereas participants assigned to the "None Can Attend andUnlimited Tickets" Condition, saw the same post from Ben but the difference was the responsesfrom Ben's friends. In this condition, everyone replied under Ben's Facebook post stating thatthey cannot attend the event. FOMO ANALYSIS 23 Participants randomly assigned to the "AllCan Attend and Unlimited Tickets" Condition read Ben's Facebook post that highlightedunlimited tickets. Under the post were responses from all Ben's friends replying that they will allattend the event. Whereas participants randomly assigned to the "None Can Attend andUnlimited Tickets" Condition saw the same post from Ben but the aspect that differs in thisscenario is the responses from Ben's friends. In this condition, all of Ben's friends replied statingthat they cannot attend the event.ResultsOur second survey conditions, attendance (All and None) served as our independent variable andthe recall of how many tickets were available served our dependent variable. With thisinformation, we ran a manipulation check which revealed a significant effect, X 2 (1) 103.24, p<.001. The majority of the participants in the "All" condition correctly recalled that all thefriends were attending the event (92.5%). As well as the majority of the participants in theFor our first analysis, we ran a 2 X 2 factorial ANOVA with scarcity (Limited or Unlimited) andattendance (All or None) as our independent variables and "I would feel frustrated" as ourdependent variable. There was no main effect for scarcity, E(1, 203) = 1.28, p > .05. There wereno meaningful differences between limited tickets (M = 3.69, SD = 1.40) and unlimited tickets(M = 3.92, SD = 1.33). There was also no main effect for attendance, E(1, 203) = 1.82, p>.05.There was no significant difference between all attending (M = 3.92, SD = 1.40) and noneattending (M = 3.67, SD = 1.33). There was no significant interaction, E(1, 203) = 0.78, p = .379.This indicates that participants did not differ in their assessments of whether they would feelfrustrated when all attended and limited tickets available (M = 3.74, SD = 1.48), none 29 canattend and limited tickets available (M = 3.65, SD = 1.32), all attended and unlimited ticketsavailable (M = 4.12, SD = 1.29), or when none attended and limited tickets available (M = 3.70,SD = 1.35) We ran another 2 X 2 factorial ANOVA with tickets (Limited or Unlimited) andattendance (All or None) as our independent variable and "I would feel like I was missing out"as our dependent variable. There was no main effect for tickets EL1, 203) = 0.00, p > .05. Therewere no meaningful differences between limited tickets (M=4.13, SD = 1.47) and unlimitedtickets (M = 4.14, SD = 1.57). However, there was a significant main effect for attendance, E1,203) = 10.66, p <.001. Participants felt like they were missing out when all the friends attendedthe event (M = 4.45, SD = 1.50) than when none of the friends would attend (M = 3.79, SD =1.46). However, there was no significant interaction between tickets and attendance, E(1,203) =1.06, p > .05. Thus, there were no differences in participants feeling of missing out between allcan attend and limited tickets (M = 4.35, SD = 1.53), none can attend and limited tickets (M =3.89, SD = 1.37), all can attend and unlimited tickets (M=4.56, SD = 1.46)) and none can attendand unlimited tickets (M = 3.67, SD = 1.46).

Accepted Answer

A system called a FOMO (Fear of Missing Out) analysis is used to evaluate the probable outcomes and…