Overall, people stated getting the same amount of money and time reasons (M
People conveyed the newest the amount to which new excuse featured beyond new justification-giver’s private control on a beneficial eight-part measure (between 1, not really so you’re able to 7, much).
Volume out of 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.
Detected intimacy
To increase our https://datingranking.net/local-hookup/phoenix 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).
Recognized controllability
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).
Recognized trustworthiness
Participants perceived greater trustworthiness from a money excuse than a time excuse (Mmoney = 5.08, SD = 1.76; Mtime = 4.50, SD = 1.84, t(63) = 2.49, p = .01, d = .62).
Mediation
We examined if higher cousin quantities of closeness away from a money justification (vs. a time excuse) are serially mediated by understood controllability, causing increased perceptions of trustworthiness. To evaluate having serial mediation, we put MEMORE (Montoya & Hayes, 2017 ), after the model dos. The results demonstrate that thinking out of controllability and you will honesty perform serially mediate the relationship anywhere between interacting an economic justification and better cousin levels of intimacy (95% CI, .00 to .18; See Appendix S1, Dining table S2).
Talk
People exactly who received one another a period of time and a finance reason believed just as alongside its traffic before getting the latest justification. Yet not, as opposed to those exactly who acquired a period reason responding so you can the relationships invitation, members believed rather nearer to their relationship people immediately after finding an excellent currency reason. The difference for the observed intimacy happened due to the fact currency excuses had been understood because the faster manageable, and as a result, even more trustworthy.
One to difference in the outcomes for the research hence out-of Research 1A is that we failed to to see a significant drop off during the observed intimacy just after searching a loans justification. It could be that a funds reason is especially great at response to a marriage invite. When you find yourself Studies 1A and you may 1B promote first assistance in regards to our theoretic model, the newest remember characteristics ones degree may have biased our overall performance, such that players might have appreciated excuses that were eg unsatisfying. Further, the fresh new pre/article dimension of one’s closeness level possess composed a consult impression. Ergo, on the training you to definitely go after, we present greater fresh manage from the asking participants to check on vignettes in which we controlled precisely the financial support referenced from the justification and you may measured attitudes from controllability, trust, and intimacy responding to that correspondence.