Table 2.
Receptivity and Reactivity to IVR among High and Low Rrequency Responders
| Full Sample | High Frequency (n=35) | Low Frequency (n=62) | p | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| M (SD) | M (SD) | M (SD) | ||
| Receptivity | ||||
| Took too much time | 1.07 (1.10) | 0.74 (0.9) | 1.31 (1.2) | .019 |
| Easy to understand | 3.55 (0.63) | 3.49 (0.7) | 3.59 (0.5) | .449 |
| Became easier and faster | 3.26 (0.88) | 3.51 (0.7) | 3.08 (1.0) | .025 |
| Calls were disruptive | 1.50 (1.18) | 0.94 (0.8) | 1.9 (1.2) | <.001 |
| Reactivity | ||||
| Increased awareness | 2.10 (1.13) | 1.94 (1.2) | 2.20 (1.1) | .297 |
| Purposeful behavior change | 0.89 (0.99) | 0.94 (1.1) | 0.86 (0.9) | .699 |
Note. Response options range from 0 to 4 with 0 = “Not at all”, 1 = “Slightly”, 2 “Moderately”, 3 = “Very much”, and 4 = “Extremely” Significant differences bolded for emphasis.