Health Care Industry
Industry: Email Alert RSS FeedTruth and consequences: using the bogus pipeline to examine sex differences in self-reported sexuality
Journal of Sex Research, Feb, 2003 by Michele G. Alexander, Terri D. Fisher
(1) According to Cohen (1988), an [[eta].sup.2] of .01 indicates a small effect corresponding to .2 of a standard deviation, an [[eta].sup.2] of .059 indicates a moderate effect corresponding to .5 of a standard deviation, and an [[eta].sup.2] of .138 reflects a large effect corresponding to .8 of a standard deviation.
REFERENCES
Baumeister, R. E, Catanese, K. R., & Vohs, K. D. (2001). Is there a gender difference in strength of sex drive? Theoretical views, conceptual distinctions, and a review of relevant evidence. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 242-273.
- Most Popular Articles in Health
- Fuel your workout: exercisers who eat before they work out have more energy ...
- Soothe a dry, itchy scalp: 5 easy expert solutions
- Cocktails and calories: Beer, wine and liquor calories can really add up. ...
- The sour truth about apple cider vinegar - evaluation of therapeutic use
- The, six best supplements you've never heard of: these secret weapons can ...
- More »
Baumeister, R. E, & Sommer, K. L. (1997). What do men want? Gender differences and the two spheres of belongingness: Comment on Cross and Madson. Psychological Bulletin, 122, 38-44.
Brown, N. R., & Sinclair, R. C. (1999). Estimating lifetime sexual partners: Men and women do it differently. The Journal of Sex Research, 36, 292-297.
Browning, J. R., Kessler, D., Hatfield, E., & Choo, E (1999). Power, gender, and sexual behavior. The Journal of Sex Research, 36, 342-347.
Buss, D. M. (1998). Sexual strategies theory: Historical origins and current status. The Journal of Sex Research, 35, 19-31.
Buss, D. M., & Schmidt, D. P. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: An evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychological Review, 100, 204-232.
Catania, J., Gibson, D. R., Marin, B., Coates, T. J., & Greenblatt, R. M. (1990). Response bias in assessing sexual behaviors relevant to HIV transmission. Evaluation and Program Planning, 13, 19-29.
Cejka, M. A., & Eagly, A. H. (1999). Gender-stereotypic images of occupations correspond to sex segregation of employment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 413-423.
Clark, R., & Hatfield, E. (1989). Gender differences in receptivity to sexual offers. Journal of Psychology and Human Sexuality, 2, 39-55.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Cohen, L. L., & Shotland, R. (1996). Timing of first sexual intercourse in a relationship: Expectations, experiences, and perceptions of others. The Journal of Sex Research, 33, 291-299.
Cowart-Steckler, D., & Pollack, R. H. (1988). The Cowart-Pollack Scale of Sexual Experience. In C. M. Davis, W. L. Yarber, & S. L. Davis (Eds.), Sexuality related measures: A compendium (pp. 9192). Lake Mills, IA: Graphic Publishing.
Eagly, A. H. (1987). Sex differences in social behavior: A social role interpretation. Hillside, NJ: Erlbaum.
Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (1999). The origins of sex differences in human behavior: Evolved dispositions versus social roles. American Psychologist, 54, 408-423.
Eagly, A. H., Wood, W., & Diekman, A. (2000). Social role theory of sex differences and similarities: A current appraisal. In T. Eckes & H. M. Trautner (Eds.), The developmental social psychology of gender (pp. 123-174). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Elo, I. T., King, R. B., & Furstenberg, E E (1999). Adolescent females: Their sexual partners and the fathers of their children. Journal of Marriage & Family, 61, 74-84.