Table 5.
Communication form | Total (N = 286) | < 2 h drive (n = 128) | > 2 h drive (n = 158) | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
M | SD | M | SD | M | SD | |
Telephone | 4.24a | 1.29 | 4.34c | 1.19 | 4.15a | 1.36 |
Face-to-face | 4.19a | 1.17 | 4.76a | 1.01 | 3.73b | 1.08 |
Texting | 2.77c | 1.98 | 2.89d | 2.03 | 2.67c | 1.93 |
Video conferencing | 1.98b | 1.52 | 1.67b | 1.34 | 2.22 cd | 1.62 |
Letters/postcards | 1.85b | 1.05 | 1.79b | 1.02 | 1.90d | 1.07 |
1.26 | 0.84 | 1.19 | 0.68 | 1.32 | 0.96 | |
Social Media | 1.13 | 0.68 | 1.13 | 0.71 | 1.12 | 0.66 |
F(3.31,944.67) = 210.11, p < .001, η2G = .34 | F(3,380.84) = 156.24, p < .001, η2G = .47 | F(3.28,515.03) = 81.38, p < .001, η2G = .26 |
Communication frequency was measured on a Likert scale ranging from 1 = (almost) never to 7 = (almost) daily. Means with different subscripts within the same column are significantly different (p < .01 based on pairwise comparisons with Bonferroni correction for multiple testing). Means without subscripts were excluded from inferential statistical analysis due to extreme low variability of observations