All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

Effects of Helper and Recipient Sex on the Experience and Outcomes of Comforting Messages: An Experimental Investigation
Unformatted Document Text:  Effects of Helper and Recipient Sex 15 assess the validity of the experimental manipulations are described in detail by Jones and Guerrero (2001). Coding and Manipulation Checks for Verbal Person Centeredness and Nonverbal Immediacy Three coders were used to code NVI and VPC from the videotaped conversations. Two primary coders rated all verbal messages and nonverbal cues, respectively, whereas the secondary coder coded 98 of the tapes for NVI (dyad n = 98) behaviors and 118 of the tapes for VPC (dyad n = 118). The primary coder ratings were used as the manipulation checks for later analyses. The secondary coder ratings were used as a reliability check but were not used in the data analyses. NVI was measured with a modified version of Andersen, Andersen, and Jensen’s (1979) nonverbal immediacy instrument. Interitem reliability was = .91. The VPC scale consisted of five 7-point semantic differential scales identifying fundamental features of person-centeredness (i.e., self-centered vs. other-centered, invalidates vs. validates, judges vs. empathizes, disregards vs. acknowledges, and unconcerned vs. concerned). Interitem reliability was = .98. Interrater reliabilities (based on Ebel’s intraclass r) were .98 for the NVI measure and .95 for the VPC measure. Nonverbal immediacy. The NVI manipulation was analyzed with a 3 x 3 (NVI: high, moderate, low x VPC: high, moderate, low) analysis of variance (ANOVA), with coder ratings of NVI as the dependent measure. The ANOVA yielded a significant effect for NVI, F (2, 207) = 1906.03, p < .001, η 2 = .94. However, the ANOVA also revealed a significant effect VPC, F (2, 207) = 2.51, p < .001, η 2 = .03, and for the VPC x NVI interaction, F (4, 207) = 2.89, p < .05, η 2 = .02. The linear effect for NVI was further explored with a linear contrast, which revealed a

Authors: Jones, Susanne. and Burleson, Brant.
first   previous   Page 15 of 51   next   last



background image
Effects of Helper and Recipient Sex 15
assess the validity of the experimental manipulations are described in detail by Jones and
Guerrero (2001).
Coding and Manipulation Checks for Verbal Person Centeredness and Nonverbal Immediacy
Three coders were used to code NVI and VPC from the videotaped conversations. Two
primary coders rated all verbal messages and nonverbal cues, respectively, whereas the
secondary coder coded 98 of the tapes for NVI (dyad n = 98) behaviors and 118 of the tapes for
VPC (dyad n = 118). The primary coder ratings were used as the manipulation checks for later
analyses. The secondary coder ratings were used as a reliability check but were not used in the
data analyses.
NVI was measured with a modified version of Andersen, Andersen, and Jensen’s (1979)
nonverbal immediacy instrument. Interitem reliability was = .91. The VPC scale consisted of
five 7-point semantic differential scales identifying fundamental features of person-centeredness
(i.e., self-centered vs. other-centered, invalidates vs. validates, judges vs. empathizes, disregards
vs. acknowledges, and unconcerned vs. concerned). Interitem reliability was = .98. Interrater
reliabilities (based on Ebel’s intraclass r) were .98 for the NVI measure and .95 for the VPC
measure.
Nonverbal immediacy. The NVI manipulation was analyzed with a 3 x 3 (NVI: high,
moderate, low x VPC: high, moderate, low) analysis of variance (ANOVA), with coder ratings
of NVI as the dependent measure. The ANOVA yielded a significant effect for NVI, F (2, 207) =
1906.03, p < .001,
η
2
= .94. However, the ANOVA also revealed a significant effect VPC, F (2,
207) = 2.51, p < .001,
η
2
= .03, and for the VPC x NVI interaction, F (4, 207) = 2.89, p < .05,
η
2
= .02. The linear effect for NVI was further explored with a linear contrast, which revealed a


Convention
All Academic Convention can solve the abstract management needs for any association's annual meeting.
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 15 of 51   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.