Claims

Male and female subjects responded differently, confounding interpretation

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 1953 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q2 i? Men and women varied in their responses to the presentation conditions, confounding interpretation of the findings. → Jarrett 1953

Evidence

Jarrett 1953

Jarrett, R. F., & Sherriffs, A. C. (1953). Propaganda, Debate, and Impartial Presentation as Determiners of Attitude Change. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 48, 33–41. doi:10.1037/h0062882 (read through Allen's 1953 research abstract, doi:10.1007/bf02713265)

q2 · i? · causal · r1

The authors report that "Men and women Ss varied in their responses to these conditions, thus confounding the interpretation of the findings" and that results were not in each case statistically significant.

"Men and women Ss varied in their responses to these conditions, thus confounding the interpretation of the findings, but the results, though not in each case statistically significant, are not inconsistent with our hypotheses concerning the nature of attitude change."

Discussion

Learner Variables

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-28
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.