Download Lecture_17 - University of Alberta

Lecture 17 – Psyco 350, B1
Fall, 2011
N. R. Brown
Outline
1. Autobiographical Memory – Part 2
2. The Partner Discrepancy – Part 2
Psyco 350 Lec #15– Slide 2
Studying E-to-E Organization: Event-cueing
Brown & Schopflocher (1998)
General Method:
Cueing event: auto event1 [E1]

Cued event:
auto event2 [E2]
Assumption:
E1 & E2 often associated
Implication:
pattern of E1  E2 relations reflects underlying
organization
Brown & Schopflocher (1998)
Two groups (during Phase 1 only):
word-cued group
important-event group
Five Phases:
1. generate cueing events
2. event-cueing task
3. relations-coding task
4. event-dating task
5. Importance-rating task
Phase 1
Important-Events Condition
• E1 acquisition: Prompt
event1 [E1]
• task: to recall important personal event
• (e.g., my mom and telling me that my dad was
going to move out)
• 14 trials
• Retrieval time was measured
• Memories (E1s) were typed
• 72 undergrads
Phase 1
Word-Cue Condition
• E1 acquisition: Cue word
event1 [E1]
• task: to recall a personal event related to the
cue word
• CAR
when I was 15, I stole a car.
• 14 nouns
• Retrieval time was measured
• Memories (E1s) were typed
• 73 undergrads
Phase 2
Event-cueing Task
• Identical for both important-events and wordcue conditions
• E2 acquisition: event1 [E1]
event2 [E2]
• My mom and dad telling me my dad was going
to move out [E1]
Dad leaving a note on my
pillow saying bye [E2] .
• All E1s served as cues
• Retrieval time was measured
• Memories (E2s) were typed
Phase 3
Relation-Coding Task
• Identical for both important-events and wordcue conditions
• [E1 & E2] + Relation Menu
Select relation(s)
• All event pairs scored
• Unrestricted selection
• Untimed
Phase 3
Relation-Coding Task
• Event A: My mom and dad telling me my dad was
going to move out.
• Event B: Dad leaving a note on my pillow saying bye
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Did event A and B involve the same person or persons?
Did event A and B involve the same activity?
Did event A and B involve the same location?
Did one of the events cause the other?
Is one of the events part of the other?
Are both events part of a single broader event?
Are event A and event B related in some other way?
Phase 4
Event Dating Task
• Identical for both conditions
• Ex
Date for Ex
• My mom and dad was telling me my dad was
going to move out
June 30, 1986
• All events dated
• Random presentation
• Untimed
Phase 5
Importance Rating Task
• Identical for both conditions
• Ex
Importance rating for Ex (1-to-5 scale)
• My mom and dad was telling me my dad was
going to move out
5
• All events rated
• Random presentation
• Untimed
Horizontal Organization: Two General Positions
Special Narrative Processing Position
• created ONLY by narrative processing given to
important life stories
Matter-of-Course Position
• normal memory processing
• higher-level cognitive processing
– planning, evaluation, comprehension
• narration
Competing Predictions
Narrative Position:
• Only important events will frequently cue
cluster mates.
Matter-of-course Position:
• Important and unimportant events will
frequently cue cluster mates
B&S Results: Event Age
B&S: Results
Defining clustered Pairs:
• Clustered Pairs:
– Either cause, subevent, or "same story" relation
indicated.
• Nonclustered Pairs:
– Neither cause, subevent, nor "same story" relation
indicated.
% Clustered:
• Important-Events Group:
• Word-Cued Group:
81%
75%
Percentage of Clustered Pairs
B&S Results: Clustering & Importance
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
Important-Events Group
Word-Cued Group
10
0
1
2
3
4
5
Cueing Event Importance
B&S Results: Clustered vs Nonclustered Pairs
Median Time(sec) to Retrieve Cued event (E2)
importantevent
word-cued
6.8
6.6
nonclustered 8.4
8.2
clustered
Median Difference(Days) between Cueing (E1)
& Cued Event (E2)
importantevent
word-cued
clustered
2.0
1.0
nonclustered
210.5
319.5
B&S Results: Clustered vs Nonclustered Pairs
Interevent Relations as a Function of Clustering
Same
Person
Same
Location
Same
Activity
Other
54%
52%
39%
16%
nonclustered 44%
33%
32%
32%
clustered
Summary
Main Claims:
• Event clusters very common
• Clustered events:
– causally & thematically related
– temporally proximate
Evidence:
• 80% clustered
• RT: clustered < nonclustered
• Age s: clustered << nonclustered
• Overlapping story elements:
– clustered > nonclustered
Interpreting Event Clusters
• A Strong Narrative Position
• Event clusters are narratives.
• Narrative processes necessary for creation/
maintenance of autobiographical memory.
Interpreting Event Clusters
• A Comprise Position
• Clustering prompted by:
– temporal contiguity
– similarity
– causal reasoning
– goal directed planning and evaluation
• Narrative creation/maintenance facilitated by
clustering
Retrieval Processes in Autobiographical
Memory (Uzer, Lee & Brown, 2011)
Models of Autobiographical memory (AM)
assume two retrieval strategies:
– Generative retrieval
– Direct retrieval
Generative retrieval has been assumed as
a normative form of retrieval
Introduction
Retrieval processes: Reaction time (RT)
Studies have shown:
– Concrete nouns < emotion terms
– Personal periods < common activities
– Common activities < general actions
Introduction
RT differences:
– As an index of effort required to generate
appropriate cues
– Generation is easy and fast, when cue
accesses to associative links
– Generation is slower and harder, when
cue must be reformulated to access to
associative links
Introduction
Dual Retrieval Strategies Approach:
– RT differences reflect multiple retrieval
strategies
– RTs reflect weighted blend of generative
and direct retrieval modes
Current Questions
• How common are direct and generative
retrieval?
• Would retrieval strategy change as a
function of task conditions (e.g., the
types of cues provided)?
• Would RT differences still occur holding
retrieval strategy constant?
Exp 1: Method
40 U of A undergraduate students
Within-subjects design
Procedure: Cue word :
“specific
personal event that is related to the cue
word”
Two types of cue words:
– Concrete nouns (e.g., chair, pencil, book)
– Emotion terms (e.g., shy, happy, sad)
Exp 1: Method
Concurrent verbal protocols:“Think out loud
by verbalizing all your thoughts as you are
thinking them”
Pressing SPACEBAR as memory is retrieved
(RT)
Strategy Report: Participants were asked if
the memory came directly into mind - “Y” for
YES or “N” for NO
Brief written report of memory
Exp 1: Results
Exp 1: Method
Exp 1: Method
Exp 1: Method
Exp 1: Issues
Concurrent verbal protocols: Reactivity to
generative retrieval
“Did this memory came immediately to mind”
might create a demand for directly retrieved
memories.
Exp 2: Method
300 U of A undergraduate students
Procedure: Cue-words ---- AM (Identical to
Exp 1.)
Pressing SPACEBAR as memory is retrieved
(RT)
Exp 2: Method
Strategy Report:
Cond. 1 (Direct): “Did the memory come
immediately to mind” Yes or No responses
Cond. 2 (Generative ) : “Did you actively
search to recall this memory?” Yes or No
responses
Cond. 3 (Both Option): “How did you retrieve
this memory?”
-The memory came immediately to mind
-I actively searched to recall the memory
Generative Ret.
Direct Ret.
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Concrete
Emotion
Concrete
Emotion
Direct Condition
Generative Condition
12
11
10
Median RTs (sec)
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Direct
Generative
Direct Condition
Generative Condition
8
7
Median RTs (sec)
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Concrete
Emotion
Generative Ret.
Direct Ret.
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Concrete
Emotion
Concrete
Emotion
Exp 2: Issues
Problems:
Participants might be deciding about their
retrieval strategies based on time.
Asking people whether memory directly came
to mind or you searched is confounded with
time.
When you directly retrieve it is fast when you
search it takes time.
Exp 3: Rationale
Another approach: looking at “use of
information”.
Direct Retrieval: You don’t use any
information to find the memory, the
memory comes straight to your mind.
Generative Retrieval: To find the memory
you have to search for/use some type of
information (e.g., people in your life, any
time period, places you have been, etc).
Exp 3: Method
300 U of A undergraduate students
Procedure: Cue-words ---- AM (Identical to
Exp 1.)
Pressing SPACEBAR as memory is retrieved
(RT)
Exp 3: Method
Strategy Report:
Condition 1 (Direct Cond.):“This memory was
triggered by the cue word so I did not have
to use information about my life to help me
recall this memory.” Yes or No responses
Yes: Direct Retrieval
Exp 3: Method
Strategy Report:
Condition 2 (Generative Cond.) : “This
memory wasn’t triggered by the cue word so
I had to use information about my life to help
me recall this memory.” Yes or No responses
Yes: Generative Retrieval
Generative Ret.
Direct Ret.
80
75
70
65
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
80
75
70
65
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Concrete
Emotion
Concrete
Emotion
Direct Condition
Generative Condition
8
7
Median RTs (sec)
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Concrete
Emotion
Direct Condition
Generative Condition
12
11
10
Median RTs (sec)
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Direct
Generative
Direct Ret.
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Generative Ret.
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Concrete
Emotion
Concrete
Emotion
Significance and Future Questions
Showed the prevalence of direct retrieval in
autobiographical memory
Utility of using retrieval strategy and RT
measures to interpret RT differences in
retrieving autobiographical memories,
Accounted for cue type effect in
autobiographical memory retrieval
Experimental Summary
Multiple strategies
Strategy selection restricted by memory contents
Bias & Strategy related:
• enumeration underestimation
• rough aprox overestimation
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 51
Lifetime Partner Discrepancy from the MSP
Multiple strategies:
• Enumeration
• Rough Approximation
• Others(?)
Strategy & magnitude related.
• enumeration < rough aprox
Strategy selection related to sex
♀>♂
Rough Aprox: ♂ > ♀
• Enumeration:
•
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 52
MSP Predictions – Past Year Estimates
• Comparable past-year reports
• Multiple strategies used
• Strategy & magnitude related
• Strategy & sex of respondent unrelated
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 53
A Questionnaire Study: Brown & Sinclair (1999)
Method:
• Demographics
• SP reports:
– lifetime estimate & written strategy report
– past-year estimate & written strategy report
• Attitude measures
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 54
A Questionnaire Study: Brown & Sinclair (1999)
Participants:
University Students: AB, PA, NJ
1036 ♀
687 ♂
Age: M = 20.7
MD = 19
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 55
Percent of Participants
Distribution of SP Estimates -- AlbertaQ
40
35
Men
Women
30
25
Mean SP
3.5
2.4
MD SP
1
1
20
Men
Women
15
10
5
0
0
5
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 > 50
Estimated Number of Lifetime SPs
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 56
Sexual Active Subset -- AlbertaQ
• Most active 10%; SP  8
• Heterosexual
• 90 Females
Age: md = 22
SPs: m = 13.61
• 85 Males
Age: md = 23
SPs: m = 19.91
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 57
Percent of Participants
SP Est– Sexaul Active Subset -- AlbertaQ
2.31
Men
Women
1.98
1.65
Mean SP
19.9
13.6
MD SP
15
12
1.32
Men
Women
0.99
0.66
0.33
0.00
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Estimated Number of Lifetime SPs
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 58
> 50
Protocol Content – AlbertaQ
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 59
Sample Protocols -- AlbertaQ
Enumeration (Retrieve & Count)
• "By retracing chronologically the partners I've had.
Beginning with the first, ending with the present." -M, 20
• "I recalled and counted."
-- F, 18
• "Counted all the names I remembered." -- F, 11
• "I can recall who they were and can count them." -F, 15
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 60
Sample Protocols -- AlbertaQ
Rough Approximation
• “Rough guess, give or take 1 or 2 partners." -- M, 16
• "Rough estimate plus-or-minus error 5" -- M, 20
•"I used to keep count. # has slowed down is likely
about there" -- M, "30 (or so)“
• "It is a guess based on the amount of partners I have
had at the minimum.“ -- M, 50
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 61
Sample Protocols -- AlbertaQ
Retrieved Tally
• "Keep track of them as they occurred." -- M, 21
• "I know the number without thinking as it has
been previously discussed among friends“-- M,
10
• "I didn't estimate. I've kept count."-- F, 11
• "I kept track in my diary and I know that my
boyfriend is #27." -- F, 27
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 62
Sample Protocols -- AlbertaQ
Rate
• "Avg of 5/year from 16-21, then remained
monogamous." -- M, 25
• "The average length of relationship since the time I
became sexually active." -- M, 20
Ambiguous/Unclear
• "Memory." -- M, 22“
• “I remember them."-- M, 10
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 63
Strategy Usage – Sexual Active – AlbertaQ
Percent of SA Participants
60
55
50
45
Men
Women
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
EN
TA
AP
AM
EN = ENumeration TA = TAlly AP= rough APproximation AM = AMbiguous
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 64
MD Lifetime SPs X Strategy Sexual Active
AlbertaQ
Men
Women
32
MD Lifetime SP
28
24
20
16
12
8
4
0
EN
TA
AM
AP
EN = ENumeration TA = TAlly AM = AMbiguous AP= rough APproximation
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 65
Past-Year Estimates
• Male (m=3.45)  Female (m=2.58)
• Multiple strategies used.
• Strategy use & SP related
• No relation between sex & strategy
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 66
Summary Lifetime Estimates
♂ SPs > ♀ SPs
Multiple strategies used.
Strategy & magnitude related
• enumeration < rough aprox
Sex & strategy related.
• enumeration: ♀ > ♂
• rough aprox: ♂ > ♀
Conclusion:
• MSP accounts for discrepancy
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 67
Summary: Past-Year Estimates
♂ SPs  ♀ SPs
Multiple strategies used.
Strategy & magnitude related
Sex & strategy unrelated.
Implications:
• bad faith responses unlikely
• ♂ & ♀ from same sample
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 68
USA Population Surveys-- Tess
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 69
USA Population Surveys – TessW & TessT
• TESS -- Time-sharing Experiments for the Social
Sciences
• NSF funded program – Survey-based
Experiments
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 70
USA Web-based Surveys – TessW & TessT
Motivations:
1. Replication
2. Modality Effects
3. Assess impact of self-screening questions
4. Assess strategy manipulations
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 71
USA Web-based Surveys – TessW & TessT
• US data collection: 2004
• TessT:
Sample: stratified sample; random digit dialed
telephone survey
• TessW -- Knowledge Network Panel:
RDD  recruit panel members
Members receive free hardware & internet service
Sample drawn at random from panel.
Data collect via web-based questionnaire.
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 72
Method -- Tess
1. Estimates # of SP – Three Versions
2. Indicated estimation strategy – Strategy Menu
3. Sexual orientation
4. Two attitude questions
5. Rate embarrassment
6. Rate truthfulness of response
7. Rate bias of responses
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 73
Method -- TessW
1. Estimates # of SP – Three Versions
Control:
“Please report your number of lifetime sexual
partners”
Approx:
“Off the top of your head, please provide a rough
estimate of your number of lifetime sexual
partners.”
Enum:
“Please think back over your lifetime starting with
your first sexual partner and count all of your
sexual partners up to and including your most
recent partner.”
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 74
Method -- Tess
2. Indicated estimation strategy – Strategy Menu
I just now thought back over my lifetime and tried to remember and count
each sexual partner.
I made a rough guess, plus or minus a few sexual partners.
It was a very small number, so I just knew.
I keep a running tally of my number of sexual partners and I remembered
this number (for example, I use a diary or I have been keeping track in my
head over time).
I thought about the number of different sexual partners who I’ve been with in
an average year and multiplied by the number of years that I’ve been
sexually active (for example, about 5 a year for 5 years equals 25)
I used some other method to come up with my response. Please specify:
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 75
Method -- Tess
3. First Attitude Question
I believe a relationship should form before someone has sex.
1=Agree
strongly
somewhat
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 76
2=Disagree
strongly
somewhat
3=Neither
Method -- Tess
4. Second Attitude Question
I would only have sex in the context of a serious relationship.
1=Agree
strongly
somewhat
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 77
2=Disagree
strongly
3=Neither
somewhat
Method -- Tess
5. Rated embarrassment
I felt embarrassed answering the questions about my number of lifetime
sexual partners
1=Agree
strongly
somewhat
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 78
2=Disagree
strongly
3=Neither
somewhat
Method -- Tess
6. Rated truthfulness of response
I was truthful in my report of my number of lifetime sexual partners
1=Agree
strongly
somewhat
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 79
2=Disagree
strongly
3=Neither
somewhat
Method -- TessW
7. Rated bias of the estimate.
In terms of report of my number of lifetime sexual partners,
I think that:
I greatly under-reported
I slightly under-reported
I was accurate in my report
I slightly over-reported
I greatly over-reported my number of lifetime sexual
partners
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 80
Research Questions
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 81
Research Questions -- Tess
• Will the strategy difference replicate?
• Mode Effects:
– Will web-based administration decrease the
discrepancy?
– Will web-based administration affect strategy
selection?
• Will self-ratings yield self-incrimination (SI)?
• Will the partner discrepancy & strategy
differences disappear when SIs removed?
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 82
Research Questions -- Tess
Mode Effect:
• Anonymity promotes disclosure.
– Discrepancy: Web < Telephone
• Web conventions (“flaming trolls”) condone
exaggeration.
– Discrepancy: Web > Telephone
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 83
Research Questions -- Tess
• Will instructions affect strategy choice?
• If so:
– Will the instructional effect be a large one?
– Will instructions effect (decreases) the discrepancy?
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 84
Results
1.
2.
3.
4.
The Sample
Strategy Differences
The Discrepancy
Attitudes
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 85
The Samples
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 86
Sample – TessT(elephone)
• Sample: n = 1641
• Relevant Subset:
heterosexual, sexually experienced
provided: SP estimate & strategy report
• Retained: 87.1%
Age
♂
♀
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 87
M
49.8
MD
N
49.0 727
51.3
50.5 702
Sample – TessW(eb)
• Sample: n = 1893
• Relevant Subset:
heterosexual, sexually experienced
provided: SP estimate & strategy report
• Retained: 89.5%
♂
♀
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 88
Age
M MD N
47.1 46 845
48.3 48 847
Classification of Respondents
Telephone
Women
Men
Sexually-experienced
Heterosexuals (SeH):
Tel – W
86.6%
Tel – M
87.5%
Web – W 90.3%
Web – M 88.7%
Web
Women Men
100
90
% Respondents
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 89
TR Se H
SI Se H
GLB
No Or
Virg
No SP
Terminate
Self-Incriminators
• Defining Self-Incriminators (SIs)
– Truthfulness Response: NR, 1, 2, or 3
• SIs uncommon -– Telephone – Women
– Telephone – Men
– Web – Women
– Web – Men
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 90
% Se H
3.7%
3.7%
5.3%
6.5%
Tr(uth) SeH Samples
♂
♀
Telephone
Age
M
MD N
49.5 49 700
51.3
50 676
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 91
♂
♀
Web
Age
M
MD
N
46.8 46 791
48.32
48 802
Strategy Differences
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 92
Strategy Selection: Sex Differences
Women
45
Men
***
40
35
30
5
5
0
0
at
R
Ap
r
*
Reported Strategy
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 93
th
er
10
O
10
***
e
15
O
th
er
15
e
20
Ta
lly
20
En
um
25
ox
25
***
at
***
R
30
lly
35
Ta
40
***
Kn
ow
Ap
ro
x
En
um
45
55
Web Survey
50
50
Kn
ow
Percentage of All Responses
55
Telephone Survey
Strategy Selection: Mode Differences
***
Men
55
50
35
30
30
25
25
20
20
15
Reported Strategy
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 94
e
R
at
lly
Ta
um
En
O
th
R
at
Ta
En
ro
Ap
Kn
+
x
0
er
0
e
5
lly
5
um
10
x
10
***
ro
***
15
er
35
***
th
40
O
40
Ap
45
Telephone
Web
45
ow
Telephone
Web
Kn
50
ow
Percentage of All Responses
55
Women
Relation between Strategy & SPs: Sex Differences
Web Survey
Telephone Survey
***
20
Median Estimated SP
Women
Men
Women
Men
18
16
14
12
10
***
8
***
6
4
***
2
Reported Strategy
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 95
er
O
th
m
En
u
ox
Ap
r
w
Kn
o
er
O
th
m
En
u
ox
Ap
r
Kn
o
w
0
Relation between Strategy & SPs: Mode Differences
Men
Women
Percentage of All Responses
20
Telephone
Web
18
***
16
Telephone
Web
14
12
10
8
***
***
6
4
*
2
Reported Strategy
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 96
er
th
O
um
En
ro
x
Ap
ow
Kn
er
th
O
um
En
ro
x
Ap
Kn
ow
0
Replicating the Partner Discrepancy
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 97
Distribution of SPs
35
Telephone Survey
30
Women
Men
Percent of Experienced Hetrosexuals
25
20
15
10
5
0
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
35
45
50
<50
Web Survey
30
Women
Men
25
20
15
10
5
0
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Reported Number of Sexual Partners
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 98
50
<50
Distribution of SPs
35
Women
30
Telepone
Web
Percent of Experienced Hetrosexuals
25
20
15
10
5
0
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
35
50
<50
Men
30
Telephone
Web
25
20
15
10
5
0
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Reported Number of Sexual Partners
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 99
50
<50
Mean SP
Mean SPs
27
All SeH
27
24
24
21
21
18
18
15
15
12
12
9
9
6
6
3
3
0
0
Col 2: 5.27
Col 2: 17.83
Col 2: 11.29
Col 2: 21.96
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 100
Tr SeH
• Effects:
Mode***
Sex***
Mode X Sex *
• SIs unimportant
Median SPs
Medain SPs
All SeH
Tr SeH
6
6
5
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
0
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 101
0
Telephone -- Women
Telephone -- Men
Web -- Women
Web -- Men
• Women:
Web > Tel
• Men:
Web = Tel
• SIs unimportant
Outliers (Se Hs)
Telephone Sample
Web Sample
3000
2000
1000
750
Reported SPs
500
250
100
75
50
40
30
20
10
7
5
3
1
Women
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 102
Men
Women
Men
Mode Effects: Sex & Mode Differences
1.0
0.9
Cumulative Percent
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
Telephone -- Women
Telephone -- Men
Web -- Women
Web -- Men
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Estimated Number of Sexual Parnters
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 103
90
100
Mode Effect: SP ≥ 10
39
Effects:
• Sex***
% 10 or More SPs
36
33
Men
Women
30
27
24
=================
21
•Web-♀ almost twice
as likely to indicate at
least 10 SPs as Tel-♀
18
15
12
Telephone
Survey
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 104
• Mode***
•Mode X Sex***
Web
• For ♂s, no effect of
Mode.
Attitudes
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 105
Are people more embarrassed on the phone?
Embarassment
5.0
Sexns
4.5
Mode X Sexns
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
Women -- Telephone
Women -- Web
Men -- Telephone
Men -- Web
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 106
Modens
Does mode affect attitude response?
I believe a
relationship should
orm before
someone has sex.
I would only have
sex in the context
of a serious
relationship.
Question #1:
Mode***
5.0
Sex***
4.5
Mode X Sex+
4.0
==============
3.5
Question #2:
Mode***
Sex***
Mode X Sex+
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
Women -- Telephone
Women -- Web
Men -- Telephone
Men -- Web
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 107
TESS Summary: Strategies
• Multiple strategies used
• Sex & strategy selection:
– Approximation: ♂ > ♀
–“Just Know”: ♀ > ♂
• Mode Effects:
– “Just Know”:
– Other:
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 108
Web > Tel
Tel > Web
And Finally…
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 109
The Discrepancy Reduced/Eliminated in 20’s
Cohort
Telephone Survey
Web Survey
1.05
Mean Log10SP
0.90
0.75
0.60
0.45
0.30
Women
Men
Women
Men
0.15
20s
30s
40s
50s
60s
70s
20s
Cohort
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 110
30s
40s
50s
60s
70s
TESS Summary: Strategies
• Estimate related to strategy
– Aprox > Enum > JK
• SPs & Aprox: ♂ > ♀
• SPs & Aprox for ♀: Web > Tel
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 111
TESS Summary: Mode Effects
• Self Incrimination:
Web > Tel
• Attitudes:
Web > Tel
• Embarrassment:
Web = Tel
Web promotes disclosure.
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 112
TESS Summary: SP
• Replicate Discrepancy
• Sex X Mode Interaction
Consistent w/ Social Desirability Account
• Sex X Cohort Interaction
Memory/Behavioral Differences
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 113
Conclusions
• Three-pronged Account necessary
– Direct evidence for
• Strategy Differences
• Social Desirability
– Sampling
• PSW – “conspicuous by their absence”
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 114
Questions
Why do men favor rough approximation?
• Memory
• Motivation
• Distributional
Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 115