Table 5.

Behavioral outcomes in naïve participant and confederate studies

Study	N	Interaction	Behavioral Outcome Measure	Alcohol's Impact Interpersonal Behavior	Hedges’s g [95% CI]
Confederate Studies
D. B. Abrams & Wilson, 1979b	32	Interaction minimally responsive confederate	Naïve observers rated verbal and nonverbal affective expression	NS	0.16 [−0.52, 0.84]
Caudill, Wilson, & Abrams, 1987 Study 1c	48	Interaction minimally responsive confederate	Amount and depth of self- disclosure	NS	0.45 [−0.15, 1.04]
Caudill et al., 1987 Study 3b	32	Interaction minimally responsive confederate	Amount and depth of self- disclosure	NS	0.16 [−0.52, 0.84]
de Boer et al., 1994	72	Interview minimally responsive confederate	Amount and depth of self- disclosure	NS	0.29 [−0.18, 0.75]
Keane & Lisman, 1980 study 1	32	Interaction minimally responsive confederate	Speech timing and content	Increase pauses	−0.73 [−1.43, −0.03]
Keane & Lisman, 1980 study 2	36	Interaction minimally responsive confederate	Speech timing and content	Increase pauses	−0.63 [−1.32, 0.06]
Schippers et al., 1997	64	Interview minimally responsive confederate	Amount and depth of self- disclosure	NS	0.01 [−0.47, 0.50]
Wilson & Abrams, 1977	32	Interaction minimally responsive confederate	Content-free speech.	NS	0.00 [−0.68, 0.68]
Wilson et al., 1980c	48	Interaction minimally responsive confederate	Naïve observers rated verbal and nonverbal affective expression	NS	0.45 [−0.15, 1.04]
Naïve-Participant Studies (Or unscripted/unidentified confederate studies)
Babor et al., 1983	16	Dyads performed competitive tasks	Bales Interaction Process Analysis	Increase expression hostility and profanity	0.82 [0.27, 1.36]
Battista et al., 2012	88	Interaction unresponsive identified confederate	Speech and gaze “safety” behaviors	Increase speech	0.42 [0.01, .84]
Frankenstein, Hay, & Nathan, 1985	16	Couples discuss relationship problem	Marital Interaction Coding System	Increase speech & positive expression	0.57 [0.06, 1.07]
Kirchner et al., 2006	54	Groups 3 unstructured interaction.	Facial Action Coding System and content-free speech	Increase speech initiation and smiling initiation	0.68 [−0.08, 1.44]
Leonard & Roberts, 1998	270	Couples discuss relationship problem	Marital Interaction Coding System	Increase negative expression and attempts at problem solving	0.42 [0.06, 0.78]
Lindfors & Lindman, 1987	16	Groups 4 watch video then discuss	Bales Interaction Process Analysis	Increase total speech, assertive speech and negative responses	1.22 [−0.48, 2.91]
Lindman, 1980	32	Interview responsive confederate	Eye gaze duration and number gaze aversions.	NS	0.00 [−0.68, 0.68]
Murdoch & Pihl, 1985	44	Groups 6 cooperative task (2 unidentified confederates)	Behavioral coding system	Increase positive expression	0.63 [0.03, 1.23]
Pliner & Cappell, 1974	120	Groups 3 cooperative task	Schachter & Wheeler amusement index	NS	0.78 [−0.09, 1.65]
Rohrberg & Sousa-Poza, 1976	32	Dyads cooperative task	Amount and depth of self- disclosure	Increase depth of self- disclosure	0.51 [−0.40, 1.41]
Samp & Monahan, 2007	42	Dyads competitive task	Coders rated vocal, facial, and body expression	Increase facial expressivity and negative expression	0.62 [0.01, 1.23]
Samp & Monahan, 2009	44	Couples discuss infidelity	Coders rated vocal, facial, and body expression	Increase gestures and speech rate	0.31 [−0.30, 0.93]
Sayette et al., 2012	720	Groups 3 unstructured interaction	Facial Action Coding System and content-free speech	Increase speech and smiling, decrease negative facial expressions	0.43 [0.15, 0.71]
Smith et al., 1975aa	36	Couples unstructured interaction	Gottschalk-Gleser Hostility Scale, units laughter, qualitative affect coding	Increased laughter and expressed giddiness and happiness.	0.47 [0.01, 0.93]
Smith et al., 1975ba	36	Couples unstructured interaction	Content-free speech coding according to Mishler & Waxier	Increase speech initiation and speech overlap	0.47 [0.01, 0.93]
Stitzer et al., 1981	18	Dyads unstructured interaction	Automated content-free speech.	Increase speech duration	N/A

Studies have overlapping alphabetical superscripts if results were drawn from same sample of participants

NS = No significant effects