Table 3: Participants’ state of mind scores for the parallel interview, and correlations
with AAI state of mind scores
|
Parallel interview scores |
Parallel mean (SD |
AAI mean (SD) |
Correlation |
|
Metacognitive monitoring |
1 |
2.78 (1.75)** |
NA |
|
Coherence of transcript |
5.23 (2.13) |
3.35 (1.73)* |
-.14 |
|
Idealising |
2.23 (1.96) |
2.50 (1.69) |
.27 |
|
Lack memory |
1.85 (1.91) |
2.70 (2.66) |
.71** |
|
Anger |
1.92 (1.38) |
2.20 (1.56) |
.79*** |
|
Passivity |
2.85 (2.08) |
3.10 (2.02) |
.65* |
|
Derogation |
1 |
1.60 (1.04)* |
NA |
|
Coherence of mind |
5.38 (2.26) |
3.43 (1.74)* |
-.04 |
All participants scored 1 on “metacognitive monitoring” and “derogation” in the
parallel interview.
NA: could not be calculated, *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001
Correlations are Spearman’s rho. Highlighted AAI means are significantly different from
parallel interview means (Wilcoxon signed ranks test).
39
More intriguing information
1. Impacts of Tourism and Fiscal Expenditure on Remote Islands in Japan: A Panel Data Analysis2. LOCAL PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES TO HELP FARM PEOPLE ADJUST
3. Popular Conceptions of Nationhood in Old and New European
4. The name is absent
5. Macroeconomic Interdependence in a Two-Country DSGE Model under Diverging Interest-Rate Rules
6. The name is absent
7. The name is absent
8. Stillbirth in a Tertiary Care Referral Hospital in North Bengal - A Review of Causes, Risk Factors and Prevention Strategies
9. The name is absent
10. The name is absent