Response: This possible investigation is fascinating, definitely, yet not for the lookup question. When your reviewer takes into account that our analyses aren’t ideal for answer our very own search concern (to not ever almost every other potentially interesting browse issues), you want to find a very clear malfunction of those suggested analyses and you can an excuse in their eyes. Given that new customer hasn’t rationalized this time and contains only demonstrated just what the guy/she’d like to see otherwise would have done by themselves/herself, here is no need to do that. What it is of one’s manuscript are obvious; perhaps not particularly challenging, but obvious: to compare profiles and you can nonusers when you look at the mating orientations. The newest advised analysis is not necessarily the one wanted to try to provide a cure for the lookup question.
Out-of a statistical viewpoint, this has been known for an eternity you to dichotomizing details isn’t good routine (Cohen, 1983).
The SOI-R performed declaration differences between someone (expected). Yet , on demonstrated regression (desk 2) the outcome was unforeseen towards Penke & Asendorpf (2008, p. 14). How does? How does this try the entire design?
Response: Once again, i’ve had difficulties to fully comprehend the opinion. Hence, we do not do people transform from this dilemma.
elizabeth.grams. 222-229: This new conversation together with idea are making reference to this new aim from users. Yet zero aim is analyzed, but perceptions. The hyperlink anywhere between both is actually lost on the blog post, please bring particular then literary works or concentrate on perceptions.
Response: We regret to not feel decided on this point. Given this creating situation, i get to know whether you will find variations in mating orientations (short-identity, long-term) based on even when you’re a user of relationships software. All of our method is based muddy matches kortingscode on past browse did about this situation and, up until the good our education, there is absolutely no option means out of this problem who’s shown as better than the current one to. For this reason, we really do not do changes in the fresh manuscript according that have so you’re able to this opinion.
Severe: New source of solitary students is actually forgotten just before (name or at least in the first 50 % of the latest abstract).
Right away of the manuscript, i discuss the things about making use of relationship applications and you will one to, in spite of the established stereotype, they are utilized for a wide variety of explanations, just to the check for casual gender
Response: Many thanks really because of it comment. Pursuing the the recommendation, i have incorporated this issue in the first 50 % of the fresh conceptual (p. 2, range twenty-eight): “Professionals were 902 single college students out-of a middle-dimensions Foreign-language school…”. Apart from that, in the Participants and you will Techniques point, i stated: “This study are part of a bigger project carried out in good Foreign language college or university one aimed to understand more about several regions of the newest sex from more youthful college students” (today, in the p. 6, outlines 142-143). Furthermore, i told you “the writer?s school” (p. 7, range 170), and this issue is mentioned into the study’s limits (now, into the p. fifteen, outlines 336-340).
235: “Conclusions”. Due to the fact correlations are displayed and you may hypothesis looked at in the a corner-sectional data, brand new text would be chosen a whole lot more innovative.
Response: I’ve cautiously seemed which section and in addition we have not been able to find any causal allege. I’ve tried to identify our very own overall performance because the ‘differences’, ‘correlations’ or ‘associations’. However if we overlooked one causal claim, we shall transform it.
The usage dating applications try evaluated rather than delving on particular uses, away from those who used it using one afternoon due to the fact good joke among friends to people exactly who tried it to possess weeks searching having a partnership
Response: Thank you for your recommendation. We’ve incorporated additional info about Limits section, to include every points stated from the writers (now inside pp. 15-16, lines 341-365):
The study has a number of restrictions. Other limitations have been linked to the fresh new representativeness of your shot and you can the new generalization of results. Among the latest users, new decide to try try generally females, old anywhere between 18 and you will 26, solitary and in one college or university, making the abilities difficult to generalize to all or any students and you may, still reduced to younger non-students.