. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Jan 1.

Published in final edited form as: J Posit Psychol. 2015 Dec 8;11(4):399–415. doi: 10.1080/17439760.2015.1117131

Table 2.

Group Comparison of Perceived Partner Responsiveness and Affect after the Partner Had a Chance to Enact the Relationship Behavior in the Lab at Time 1 and Time 2

	Active Control		Expressed Gratitude		Condition Effect

	M.	SE.	M.	SE.	B.	Sig.
T1APR	5.26	.10	5.45	.10	.18	.203
T1PE	4.04	.13	4.77	.13	.73	.000
T1NE	.23	.06	.41	.06	.18	.050
T2APR	5.30	.07	5.59	.07	.29	.009
T2 PE	3.74	.17	4.70	.17	.96	.000
T2 NE	.12	.04	.21	.04	.09	.129

Note: N=90. APR- active partner responsiveness; PE-positive emotion; NE-negative emotion. M-predicted mean value from the model; SE-standard error of the predicted value; B-unstandardized coefficients. The range of APR, PE or NE scale is [0, 6]. HLM models were used to compare the mean level difference between two groups in terms of variables in the table.