Abilities
coeducational) ? 2 (pupil intercourse: male vs. female) ANCOVAs were held into sex salience, portion of other-sex close friends, total combined-sex stress and the three anxiety subscales (select Table eight). All the consequences parameters had skewness (ranging from .040 to one.2step 35) and you will kurtosis (anywhere between .488 in order to .670) which were within this acceptable ranges . This new projected limited function and you may standard errors of your own outcome details are shown in Table 8 (correlations one of the analysis parameters was presented from inside the Dining table Elizabeth inside S1 File). The newest ANOVA performance instead of covariates come into Table F when you look at the S1 File. Mediation analyses was basically presented to understand more about if or not college or university variations in combined-gender anxiety was indeed mediated of the mixed-intercourse friendships and you will/otherwise intercourse salience. All the analyses managed for adult money, parental knowledge, number of brothers, amount of sisters, school banding, the newest five size of sexual positioning, faculty, and you can beginner age; the fresh new analyses with the combined-sex anxiety and managed getting social anxiety.
Intercourse salience.
In contrast to Study 1, there were no main effects of school type or student gender and no interaction effects on gender salience. Therefore, H1 was not supported.
Percentage of most other-gender close friends.
There was a main effect of school type, with coeducational school students reporting a larger percentage of other-gender close friends than single-sex school students, p < .001, d = .47, supporting H2. There was also a main effect of student gender, with male students reporting a larger percentage of other-gender close friends than female students (p = .005, d = .27). Consistent with H4, there was no interaction effect with student gender.
Mixed-sex stress.
Single-sex school students reported higher levels of total mixed-gender anxiety (p = .009, d = .25), Social Distress in Dating (p = .007, d = .26), and Social Distress in Mixed-gender Groups (p = .007, d = .26) than coeducational school students. There was no main effect of school in Fear of Negative Evaluation. Therefore, H3 was largely supported. Male students reported higher levels of total mixed-gender anxiety (p = .020, d = .22) and Fear of Negative Evaluation (p = .008, d = .25) than female students. There were no main effects of student gender in Social Distress in Dating and Social Distress in Mixed-gender Groups. Consistent with H4, there were no interaction effects with student gender in all forms of mixed-gender anxiety.
Supplementary studies: Did college differences confidence college or university year?
Comparing across the two samples, the differences between single-sex school students and coeducational school students were more pronounced in the high school sample, supporting H5. For example, gender salience and fear of negative evaluation differed between single-sex and coeducational school students only in the high school sample.
I subsequent used a few “College or university method of (single-sex vs. coeducational) ? Beginner sex (men against. female) ? University 12 months (first 12 months compared to. hater support non-first 12 months)” ANCOVAs towards university test (select Dining table Grams from inside the additional content) to test to possess possible school 12 months effects. Results shown no fundamental aftereffect of college or university season or people communications of college or university year.
Mediations.
As in Study 1, mediation analyses were conducted using PROCESS with 10,000 bootstrap samples and the same mediation model, except that for Study 2, the covariates were parental income, parental education, number of brothers, number of sisters, school banding, the four dimensions of sexual orientation, faculty, student age, and social anxiety. Each form of mixed-gender anxiety was analyzed separately (see Table 9). Percentage of other-gender close friends mediated the school differences in total mixed-gender anxiety, Social Distress in Dating, and Social Distress in Mixed-gender Groups, but not Fear of Negative Evaluation. Thus, H7 was partially supported. As in Study 1, there were no significant indirect effects of gender salience on either total or any particular form of mixed-gender anxiety. Alternative mediation models were also conducted (see Figure A in S1 File for the generic alternative mediation model and Table H for the results). Results showed significant indirect effects of total mixed-gender anxiety, Social Distress in Dating and Social Distress in Mixed-gender Groups on the percentage of other-gender close friends.