What conclusion about audience support is justified based on the results of Experiment 2 alone?

• A. Supportive friends can disrupt performance if they would benefit from its success.
• B. Supportive strangers can enhance performance if they would not benefit from its success.
• C. Strangers can disrupt performance if they would benefit from its success.
• D. Strangers can disrupt performance if its success would benefit the performer.

Answer: (C)

The correct choice pertains to the idea that the presence of strangers can interfere with an individual's performance when there is a perceived benefit to those strangers from the success of that individual's performance. This conclusion likely reflects findings that demonstrate how the performance levels of individuals are influenced by their evaluators—specifically, how the vested interests of strangers in the success can lead to anxiety or pressure for the performer.

For example, if strangers are present who have something to gain from the individual's success, it could create a situation where the performer feels added stress or competition, hence disrupting their ability to perform optimally. The experimental results would support this interpretation by showing a significant effect of performance under the watch of these strangers who have a stake in the outcome.

The reason why the other options do not align with the conclusions drawn from Experiment 2 is that they either misinterpret the relationship between support and performance or do not accurately reflect the dynamics of benefit and performance disruption. Thus, focusing on the connection between audience type (strangers) and the nature of their interest (having something to gain) is critical in reaching the justified conclusion.