2013scoboriafisicojepappdkencouraged.doc

Clarification and recoding of dont know responses of

Info icon This preview shows pages 16–19. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Clarification and Recoding of Don’t Know Responses Of initial DK responses, 72% were clarified to mean ‘not present’ or ‘present not remembered’. After recoding, overall output for answerable questions did not differ by group, F (1,73) = 2.56, p = .085, ω 2 = .04. An effect of instruction on overall output for unanswerable questions, F (1,73) = 3.63, p = .031, ω 2 = .06, was due to the fact that the encouraged group continued to show lower output than discouraged participants. Clarifying responses eliminated the initial difference in overall output for answerable questions and reduced the difference for unanswerable questions. Per within subjects ANOVAs (initial vs. clarified responses), accuracy
Image of page 16

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
ENCOURAGING AND CLARIFYING DON’T KNOW RESPONSES… 17 rates increased for answerable, F (1,74) = 12.83, p = .001, d = 0.43, and unanswerable questions, F (1,74) = 22.14, p < .001, d = 0.56. As to response quality, main effects of group emerged for errors and accuracy. For both question types, the encouraged group made fewer errors and demonstrated higher accuracy compared to the other groups, which did not differ; answerable errors, F (1,73) = 12.64, p < .001, ω 2 = .23; answerable accuracy, F (1,73) = 11.63, p < .001, ω 2 = .22; unanswerable errors, F (1,73) = 4.91, p = .010, ω 2 = .09; unanswerable accuracy, F (1,73) = 3.71, p = .029, ω 2 = .17. A main effect for correct responses to answerable questions also emerged, F (1,73) = .07, p = .006; the encouraged group made more correct responses than the other groups. No effects for correct rejections to unanswerable questions were found, F (1,73) = 1.52, p = .225, ω 2 = .01. Turning to the clarified DK responses (bottom of Table 3), of individuals who made at least one response of each type, encouraged participants made more ‘present not remembered’ responses to answerable questions, F (2,60) = 3.70, p = .031, ω 2 = .07, and more ‘not present’ responses to unanswerable questions, F (2,51) = 5.02, p = .010, ω 2 = .10. Similar to Study 1, when initial DK responses were controlled, these differences disappeared. Confidence ratings did not help to elucidate these findings. The groups did not differ in average confidence for unanswerable ‘not present’ statements. For answerable ‘present not remembered’ and ‘not present’ statements, main effects of group, F (2,58) = 4.16, p = .021, ω 2 = .09, F (2,36) = 4.20, p = .023, ω 2 = .14, were due to the control group making higher ratings than the other groups. Diagnosticity The diagnosticity index (bottom of Figure 1) revealed statistically significant main effects of group, F (2,73) = 4.75, p = .012, ω 2 = .09, and clarification, F (2,73) = 30.87, p < .001, η 2 = . 04. The interaction did not approach significance. Encouraging DK responses ( d = 1.03) and
Image of page 17
ENCOURAGING AND CLARIFYING DON’T KNOW RESPONSES… 18 clarifying DK responses ( d = 0.38) each increased the likelihood responses were in fact correct. Study 2 Discussion Following a week-long delay between the video and questioning, the main findings were similar to those of Study 1. Somewhat different from Study 1, the encouraged group continued to make more DK responses to unanswerable questions after clarification, but the size of the difference decreased. This may be due to the very low post-clarification DK rate in the discouraged group in Study 2. Another difference was that the control and discouraged groups
Image of page 18

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Image of page 19
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.
  • Fall '17
  • Jane Moore
  • Centrifugation, Journal of Experimental Psychology, Fourteen unanswerable questions, dk responses, Alan Scoboria

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

What students are saying

  • Left Quote Icon

    As a current student on this bumpy collegiate pathway, I stumbled upon Course Hero, where I can find study resources for nearly all my courses, get online help from tutors 24/7, and even share my old projects, papers, and lecture notes with other students.

    Student Picture

    Kiran Temple University Fox School of Business ‘17, Course Hero Intern

  • Left Quote Icon

    I cannot even describe how much Course Hero helped me this summer. It’s truly become something I can always rely on and help me. In the end, I was not only able to survive summer classes, but I was able to thrive thanks to Course Hero.

    Student Picture

    Dana University of Pennsylvania ‘17, Course Hero Intern

  • Left Quote Icon

    The ability to access any university’s resources through Course Hero proved invaluable in my case. I was behind on Tulane coursework and actually used UCLA’s materials to help me move forward and get everything together on time.

    Student Picture

    Jill Tulane University ‘16, Course Hero Intern