Further, a 2 (matchmaking condition: single child vsmitted kid, between-subject) ? dos (priming standing: love priming versus

Products having RTs off 0.402). manage priming, between-subject) ? step three (target style of: glamorous men compared to. attractive female against. average-searching aim, within-subject) repeated-procedures ANOVA try did. Just the chief outcomes and you can interactions strongly related to the fresh new study’s hypotheses are reported.

Overall performance

Disengagement indices by target type, priming condition, and relationship status are presented in Table 1. The three-way interaction from the 2 ? 2 ? 3 mixed-model ANOVA was significant, F_{(2, 210)} = 6.842, p = 0.001, partial ? 2 = 0.061. Additional simple-effects tests were performed to examine hypothesis 2 (compared to committed men in the control priming condition, committed men would reduce attention to attractive alternatives in the love priming condition), and hypothesis 3 (compared to single men in the control priming condition, single men would increase attention toward attractive women in the love priming condition), and hypothesis 4 (committed men would be less attentive than single men to attractive women in the love priming condition). For single men, compared to the baseline condition, love priming increased their attention only to attractive women, F_{(step one, 105)} = , p 2 = 0.127 (see Figure 2), while among committed men, no significant effect of priming was observed for attentional biases toward attractive women, F_{(step one, 105)} = 0.000, p = 0.986; in addition, committed men were significantly less attentive than were single men to attractive women in the love priming condition, F_{(1, 105)} = , p 2 = 0.122 (see Figure 3). Those results support the hypothesis on single men, but partially on committed men. Hypothesis 5 was that compared to committed men in the control priming condition, committed men would not increase attention toward attractive rivals in the love priming condition. Consistent with the hypothesis, result showed no significant effect of priming for attentional biases toward attractive men among committed men, F_{(step 1, 105)} = 0.002, p = 0.963 (see Figure 4). No other significant effect Travel dating service was observed under the baseline condition or love priming condition (all ps > 0.122).

Contour dos. Imply indicator from disengagement regarding most of the target products to have single men regarding the love priming and you can manage priming standards.

Shape step 3. Suggest indices away from disengagement of glamorous people having single and you may the time males in the like priming and handle priming conditions.

Contour cuatro. Suggest indices of disengagement off all address brands to possess the amount of time men regarding like priming and you will manage priming standards.

To explore whether the commitment and relationship length would affect the results, we conducted further analysis using only committed men’s data, specifically, a 2 (priming condition: love priming vs. control priming) ? 3 (target type: attractive male vs. attractive female vs. average-looking targets) repeated-measures ANOVA including logged relationship length, Companionate Love Scale score as covariates, the three-way interaction effect was not significant, F_{(dos, 106)} = 0.007, p = 0.993, no other significant effects were observed (all ps > 0.699), and the same 2 (priming condition) ? 3 (target type) repeated-measures ANOVA without logged relationship length and committed scores as covariates, the three-way interaction effect was also not significant, F_{(dos, 110)} = 0.042, p = 0.958, no other significant effects were observed (all ps > 0.169). The results showed that those covariates would not affect the results in this study.

The outcome verified your disengagement index out of unmarried people for glamorous opposite-intercourse persons is actually notably >0 under the love priming updates, t

To test hypothesis 3 (compared to RTs toward neutral picture pairs, single men would disengage with greater difficulty from attractive women in the love priming condition), and hypothesis 1 (compared to RTs toward neutral picture pairs, committed men would show difficulty disengaging from attractive women in the control priming condition), we conducted the independent-samples t-test to compare disengagement indices with zero. ₍₂₆₎ = 4.152, p 0.133).