How would you BEST describe theresults?There is a main effect of outcome: People who received the house were moresatisfied than those who did not receive the house.There is an interaction between outcome and ambivalence: Those with highambivalence were satisfied with the outcome, but only if they received thehouse. If they did not receive the house, those with high ambivalence actuallyfelt worse.There is a main effect of ambivalence: People with high ambivalence were lesssatisfied than those with low ambivalence.There is an interaction between outcome and ambivalence: Those with lowambivalence were satisfied with the outcome, but only if they received thehouse. If they did not receive the house, those with low ambivalence actuallyfelt worse.There is an interaction of outcome and satisfaction: Those who were rejectedwere more ambivalent about the house, but only if they were satisfied with theoutcome. If they were dissatisfied, those who were rejected were actually lessambivalent. Previous research suggests that ambivalence (having both positive and negativereactions to the same object) leads to discomfort. However, it's possible thatambivalence can sometimes be functional in that it can serve as a buffer when weare uncertain as to whether we will achieve a desired object or event---just in casewe don't get what we want.Participants were asked to visualize buying their first home. Some participantswere told only good things about the house whereas other participants received amixture of good and bad information (to increase ambivalence). They were thenasked to "bid" on the house. For half of the participants, their bid was accepted andfor the other half, their bid was rejected. Everyone's satisfaction with the outcomewas measured.Overall, those whose bids were "accepted" were more satisfied with the outcomethan those whose bids were "rejected." However, when the bid was rejected, thosewith high ambivalence felt better than those with low ambivalence. When the bidwas accepted, those with low ambivalence felt better than those with highambivalence.

1. There is an interaction between outcome and ambivalence, so this is false. 2. This is false. Low…

How would you BEST describe the results? There is a main effect of outcome: People who received the house were more satisfied than those who did not receive the house. There is an interaction between outcome and ambivalence: Those with high ambivalence were satisfied with the outcome, but only if they received the house. If they did not receive the house, those with high ambivalence actually felt worse. There is a main effect of ambivalence: People with high ambivalence were less satisfied than those with low ambivalence. © There is an interaction between outcome and ambivalence: Those with low ambivalence were satisfied with the outcome, but only if they received the house. If they did not receive the house, those with low ambivalence actually felt worse. There is an interaction of outcome and satisfaction: Those who were rejected were more ambivalent about the house, but only if they were satisfied with the outcome. If they were dissatisfied, those who were rejected were actually less ambivalent.