Table 1. Statistics for P2s’ post-offer ratings.
Types of offer received | ||||||
Unconditionala | Conditionalb | |||||
t- statistic | df | Mean (SD) | Mean (SD) | Mean Difference | Std. Error Difference | |
State Annoyance | 1.729 | 37.9 | 1.40(0.71) | 1.88(1.15) | 0.475 | 0.275 |
State Gratitude | 2.046* | 47 | 6.30(1.27) | 5.63(1.02) | 0.675 | 0.330 |
State Indebtedness | 0.895 | 47 | 4.96(1.72) | 4.46(2.19) | 0.502 | 0.561 |
Perceived PartnerGenuine Helpfulness | 2.014* | 47 | 5.80(1.19) | 5.13(1.15) | 0.675 | 0.335 |
Obligation to Repay | 1.828 | 47 | 4.44(1.73) | 5.33(1.69) | 0.893 | 0.489 |
Reasonableness ofP1s’ Decisions | 1.817 | 47 | 4.72(1.62) | 5.46(1.18) | 0.738 | 0.406 |
Perceived LowCost of Help | 1.880 | 47 | 3.76(1.79) | 4.67(1.58) | 0.907 | 0.482 |
Reciprocating Tendency | 2.736** | 38.6 | 6.28(0.79) | 5.46(1.25) | 0.822 | 0.300 |
Note. aN = 25. bN = 24. df = Degree of Freedom.
*p<.05 (two-tailed);
**p<.01 (two-tailed).