Test technique to evaluate the degree of perception

To test the above hypotheses has been developed a test technique to evaluate the degree of perception of the ways of manipulating the information as misleading. The methodology was laid 9 situations of equal value of business communication: failure to appear for an important meeting (3) failure to perform working duties (3) report on an unsuccessful business trip (3). To each situation were clearly spelled out by the participants of communication: or "staff member – staff member" or "staff member – the head of the Department" or "Director – employee". After the description the situation of the research participants was presented with a question and five responses that were variants of its further development (in random order). One message was true, in others, violated the principles of quality, quantity, relevance and manner of transmission of the message.

Example of technique:

"an important meeting came a staff member. An hour before, he forgot about the meeting, went to the clinic to issue the permit in sanatorium. The head of the Department asks about the reason of absence. The employee replies:

1. "Soon many new businesses will appear: the loan needs to be paid back, child in a kindergarten to arrange, besides the repairs in the apartment there".

2. Coughing and putting his forehead to his hand: "I was in the hospital and completely forgot about the meeting."

3. "I got in a small accident coming out".

4. "I completely forgot about the meeting and went to the clinic to make a tour to the resort".

5. "I was in the hospital.""

The survey participants were to rate each of the messages, based on the facts set out in situation, on a 5-point scale (Likert scale) with 1 being the least true (i.e., misleading) to 5 – the most truthful (i.e. the least misleading). Then you had to explain your choice. These explanations confirmed the external validity of the methodology. In General, the research participants explained their answers in accordance with the theory of IMT.

After several testing methods have been changed some answers, and simplified instruction. The respondents ' answers incorrectly carrying out the instruction was excluded from the analysis. The survey was conducted individually, anonymity of results was guaranteed.