228 RElS AND ZAIDEL
variables in the ANOVA were Face Sex (women, men) and Face Side (left-left,
right-right, same). A significant main effect for face side emerged,
F(2,46) = 32.39, p <.00001, reflecting a lower mean for left-left than for
right-right. The main effect for Face Sex was not significant, F(l, 23) = 4.02, p
<.06. The two-way interaction, Face Sex × Face Side, was significant,
F(2,46) = 4.76,p<.01. Figure 1 shows the nature of this interaction.
In view of the significant interaction, analyses for simple effects were applied
to the data. A significant difference between left-left and right-right emerged
only for women’s faces, (t= —2.95; d.f. = 23; p=.007), with a nonsignificant
difference for men’s faces (f= — 1.79; d.f. = 23; p = 0.09). The mean forjudging
both faces “same” was low by comparison, in both women’s and men’s faces
(see Figure 1).
Figure 1. The mean percent preference for left-left, right-right, or same (i.e.. no difference) by
subjects viewing pairs of faces and deciding which one looks healthier.
More intriguing information
1. Non Linear Contracting and Endogenous Buyer Power between Manufacturers and Retailers: Empirical Evidence on Food Retailing in France2. Outsourcing, Complementary Innovations and Growth
3. The name is absent
4. The name is absent
5. Stakeholder Activism, Managerial Entrenchment, and the Congruence of Interests between Shareholders and Stakeholders
6. 101 Proposals to reform the Stability and Growth Pact. Why so many? A Survey
7. The name is absent
8. The effect of classroom diversity on tolerance and participation in England, Sweden and Germany
9. The name is absent
10. Proceedings from the ECFIN Workshop "The budgetary implications of structural reforms" - Brussels, 2 December 2005