All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

Relationship Orientation, Jealousy, and Equity: An Examination of Jealousy Evoking and Positive Communicative Responses
Unformatted Document Text:  Relationship Orientation and Jealousy 19 Study 2: Results Research question one addressed whether equity and exchange orientation affected attempts to activate jealous responses in others. In order to have large enough cell sizes, a mean- split was performed on the exchange orientation scale so that high (N=84) and low (N=75) exchange orientation could be defined. A two-way between-groups analysis of variance was conducted to examine the impact of equity and exchange orientation on attempting to evoke jealousy. There was a statistically significant main effect for exchange orientation [F(1,153)=20.84, p=.001] and the effect size was moderate (eta squared =.12). The main effect for equity [F(2,153)=2.41, p=.09] and the interaction effect [F(2,153)=.094, p=.91] did not reach statistical significance. Research question two addressed whether feelings of equity and having a communal orientation would affect positive responses to jealousy. A mean-split was conducted in order to have large enough cell sizes on the scores from the Communal Orientation Scale to identify individuals high (N=88) and low (N=70) in communal orientation. A two-way between-groups analysis of variance was conducted to answer this question. There was a main effect for communal orientation [F(1,152)=31.83, p=.001] and the effect size was large (eta squared =.17). A main effect for equity was also found (F(2,152)=4.18, p=.02; eta squared =.05). Post-hoc comparisons using the Tukey HSD test indicated that the mean score for underbenefited (M=36.37, SD=14.25) was significantly different from both equitable (M=43.32, SD=8.36) and overbenefited (M=44.65, SD=8.48). An interaction effect was also found (F(2,152)=3.07, p=.04; eta squared =.04) indicating that the difference was in being underbenefited. No significant difference was found between equitable and overbenefited.

Authors: Cayanus, Jacob. and Booth-Butterfield, Melanie.
first   previous   Page 19 of 27   next   last



background image
Relationship Orientation and Jealousy 19
Study 2: Results
Research question one addressed whether equity and exchange orientation affected
attempts to activate jealous responses in others. In order to have large enough cell sizes, a mean-
split was performed on the exchange orientation scale so that high (N=84) and low (N=75)
exchange orientation could be defined. A two-way between-groups analysis of variance was
conducted to examine the impact of equity and exchange orientation on attempting to evoke
jealousy. There was a statistically significant main effect for exchange orientation
[F(1,153)=20.84, p=.001] and the effect size was moderate (eta squared =.12). The main effect
for equity [F(2,153)=2.41, p=.09] and the interaction effect [F(2,153)=.094, p=.91] did not reach
statistical significance.
Research question two addressed whether feelings of equity and having a communal
orientation would affect positive responses to jealousy. A mean-split was conducted in order to
have large enough cell sizes on the scores from the Communal Orientation Scale to identify
individuals high (N=88) and low (N=70) in communal orientation. A two-way between-groups
analysis of variance was conducted to answer this question. There was a main effect for
communal orientation [F(1,152)=31.83, p=.001] and the effect size was large (eta squared =.17).
A main effect for equity was also found (F(2,152)=4.18, p=.02; eta squared =.05). Post-hoc
comparisons using the Tukey HSD test indicated that the mean score for underbenefited
(M=36.37, SD=14.25) was significantly different from both equitable (M=43.32, SD=8.36) and
overbenefited (M=44.65, SD=8.48). An interaction effect was also found (F(2,152)=3.07, p=.04;
eta squared =.04) indicating that the difference was in being underbenefited. No significant
difference was found between equitable and overbenefited.


Convention
All Academic Convention makes running your annual conference simple and cost effective. It is your online solution for abstract management, peer review, and scheduling for your annual meeting or convention.
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 19 of 27   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.