2013scoboriafisicojepappdkencouraged.doc

All participants were asked the questions in a fixed

Info icon This preview shows pages 11–14. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
All participants were asked the questions in a fixed order. The interviewer recorded responses verbatim and recorded confidence for each substantive (non-DK) response. After the
Image of page 11

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… 12 questions were asked, the interviewer queried all initial DK responses. Participants were asked to explain what they meant by each DK response, and received four options: really did not know; information was not in the video ( not present ); information was present but they could not recall the information ( present not remembered ); or another reason (none were provided). The interviewer took a confidence rating all substantive clarified responses. Study 1 Results All analyses are one-way between-group ANOVAs with three groups (encouraged, discouraged, control) unless specified. Item distributions and assumptions were examined, and ANOVA was verified to be appropriate analytically (see Table 1 for responses by group). Initial Effects of Encouraging and Discouraging Don’t Know Instructions The first prediction was that encouraging DK responses would result in fewer questions being answered. Main effects emerged for the use of DK responses for answerable, F (2,75) = 9.15, p < .001, ω 2 = .17, and unanswerable questions; F (2,75) = 4.10, p = .020, ω 2 = .07. Post- hoc contrasts showed that those in the encouraged condition made more DK responses than those in the other conditions for answerable (Cohen’s d = 0.97) and unanswerable questions ( d = 0.73). There were no statistical differences between the discouraged and control conditions. As was expected, analysis of output rates paralleled the pattern of results for DK responses, with lower output associated with the encourage condition. The next six analyses examined accuracy, correct responses, and errors, for each question type separately. Errors differed by group: answerable, F (2,75) = 7.35, p < .001, ω 2 = .14, unanswerable, F (2,75) = 3.96, p = .023, ω 2 = .07. Post-hoc tests showed that encouraged participants made fewer errors than the other groups for answerable ( d = 0.90) and unanswerable ( d = 0.70) questions. The discouraged and control groups did not differ on errors. There were no
Image of page 12
ENCOURAGING AND CLARIFYING DON’T KNOW RESPONSES… 13 differences between the groups in accuracy: answerable, F (2,75) = 1.32, p = .272, ω 2 = .01, unanswerable, F (2,75) = 1.31, p = .274, ω 2 = .01; nor correct responses: answerable, F (2,75) = 0.69, p = .504, ω 2 = .00, unanswerable, F (2,75) = 0.17, p = .844, ω 2 = .00. Clarification and Recoding of Don’t Know Responses To remind, participants clarified the meanings of initial DK responses, which were recoded as correct or erroneous depending on the objective nature of the question. A majority of DK responses (70%) were clarified, and the encouraged group clarified the most responses. After recoding, the groups no longer differed in total output: answerable, F (1,75) = 1.01, p = .370, ω 2 = .00; unanswerable, F (1,75) = 1.42, p = .248, ω 2 = .01. A main effect of group for errors to answerable questions, F (2,75) = 3.73, p = .029, ω 2 = .07, was because encouraged respondents continued to make fewer errors, t (76) = 2.51, p = .014, d = 0.61. The effect for unanswerable errors was non-significant, F (2,75) = 1.71, p = .188, ω 2 = .00. The groups did not differ in accuracy or correct responses. Per within subjects ANOVAs (initial vs. clarified responses),
Image of page 13

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

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Image of page 14
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