People expressed new the total amount to which new reason featured outside of the fresh reason-giver’s personal manage on the a eight-area level (anywhere between step 1, not at all so you’re able to 7, much).
Volume off reasons
Our design allowed participants to reflect on both a money and time excuse (N = 64, % of the sample), only a money excuse (N = 15, % of the sample), or only a time excuse (N = 30, % of the sample. money = 2.87, SD = 2.16; Mtime = 3.14, SD = 2.22, t(131) = 1.20, p = .23, d = .10); attesting to the fact that these excuses may be similarly common.
To increase our statistical power, we focused our analysis on participants who reflected on both a money and a time excuse. We conducted a repeated-measures ANOVA using perceived closeness (before vs. after) as a within-subjects factor for both money and time excuses. There was a significant main effect for perceived closeness, F(1, 63) = , p < .001, ? 2 = .23; which was qualified by a significant interaction, F(1, 63) = , p < .001, ? 2 = .30 (see Figure 3). Planned contrasts indicated that prior to receiving an excuse, participants felt equally close to their guests (Mmoney = 4.56, SD = 1.61; Mtime = 4.88, SD = 1.54, F(1, 63) = 2.08, p = .16, ? 2 = .03), but after the excuse was provided, participants felt significantly closer to guests who cited financial versus time scarcity (Mmoney = 4.41, SD = 1.76; Mtime = 3.62, SD = 1.69, F(1, 63) = , p = .001, ? 2 = .17).
Participants perceived a money excuse to be significantly more outside of the excuse-giver’s personal control than a time excuse (Mmoney = 4.98, SD = 1.75; Mtime = 4.31, SD = 2.01, t(63) = 2.30, p = .02, d = .58). Continue reading