Page 190 - Demo

188AppendicesTable S9. Model table for the Bayesian mixed model that predicts RTfrom Date outcome and Gender.RTPredictors Estimates CI (95%)Intercept 0.82 -1.14 – 2.824Gender[Female] 0.97 -1.08 – 2.99DateAgainProbe[yes] -0.81 -3.16 – 1.45DateAgainDistractor[yes] 2.20 0.22 – 4.24Gender[Female]:DateAgainProbe[yes] 2.31 0.00 – 4.66Gender[Female]:DateAgainDistractor[yes] 0.62 -1.42 – 2.67Random Effectsσ2 2588.97τ00Subject 1.60τ11Subject:DateAgainP robe[yes] 26.92τ11Subject:DateAgainDistractor[yes] 4.71NSubject 56Observations 3251Notes: All predictors were sum-coded.Table S10. Total number of trials per level of the predictors per Gender.Female (N = 17) Male (N = 18)Pre-date attractiveness left1 74 742 216 1583 164 1954 180 1975 84 1046 44 517 0 28Pre-date attractiveness right1 79 392 139 943 196 1814 180 2175 104 1666 64 937 0 17Table S11. Average Bias score (proportion of time looking at left picture)and SD (between brackets) per level of Pre-date attractiveness rating of theleft picture and Gender.1234567Female 0.3 (0.27) 0.39 (0.26) 0.48 (0.27) 0.52 (0.29) 0.57 (0.28) 0.68 (0.21)Male 0.36 (0.24) 0.37 (0.2) 0.4 (0.26) 0.42 (0.27) 0.59 (0.31) 0.73 (0.18) 0.89 (0.16)Table S12. Average Bias score (proportion of time looking at left picture)and SD (between brackets) per level of Pre-date attractiveness rating of theright picture and Gender.1234567Female 0.3 (0.27) 0.39 (0.26) 0.48 (0.27) 0.52 (0.29) 0.57 (0.28) 0.68 (0.21)Male 0.36 (0.24) 0.37 (0.2) 0.4 (0.26) 0.42 (0.27) 0.59 (0.31) 0.73 (0.18) 0.89 (0.16)Table S11. Average Bias score (proportion of time looking at left picture)and SD (between brackets) per level of Pre-date attractiveness rating of theleft picture and Gender.1234567Female 0.3 (0.27) 0.39 (0.26) 0.48 (0.27) 0.52 (0.29) 0.57 (0.28) 0.68 (0.21)Male 0.36 (0.24) 0.37 (0.2) 0.4 (0.26) 0.42 (0.27) 0.59 (0.31) 0.73 (0.18) 0.89 (0.16)Table S12. Average Bias score (proportion of time looking at left picture)and SD (between brackets) per level of Pre-date attractiveness rating of theright picture and Gender.1234567Female 0.3 (0.27) 0.39 (0.26) 0.48 (0.27) 0.52 (0.29) 0.57 (0.28) 0.68 (0.21)Male 0.36 (0.24) 0.37 (0.2) 0.4 (0.26) 0.42 (0.27) 0.59 (0.31) 0.73 (0.18) 0.89 (0.16)Table S11. Average Bias score (proportion of time looking at left picture)and SD (between brackets) per level of Pre-date attractiveness rating of theleft picture and Gender.1234567Female 0.3 (0.27) 0.39 (0.26) 0.48 (0.27) 0.52 (0.29) 0.57 (0.28) 0.68 (0.21)Male 0.36 (0.24) 0.37 (0.2) 0.4 (0.26) 0.42 (0.27) 0.59 (0.31) 0.73 (0.18) 0.89 (0.16)Table S12. Average Bias score (proportion of time looking at left picture)and SD (between brackets) per level of Pre-date attractiveness rating of theright picture and Gender.1234567Female 0.3 (0.27) 0.39 (0.26) 0.48 (0.27) 0.52 (0.29) 0.57 (0.28) 0.68 (0.21)Male 0.36 (0.24) 0.37 (0.2) 0.4 (0.26) 0.42 (0.27) 0.59 (0.31) 0.73 (0.18) 0.89 (0.16)Table S11. Average Bias score (proportion of time looking at left picture)and SD (between brackets) per level of Pre-date attractiveness rating of theleft picture and Gender.1234567Female 0.3 (0.27) 0.39 (0.26) 0.48 (0.27) 0.52 (0.29) 0.57 (0.28) 0.68 (0.21)Male 0.36 (0.24) 0.37 (0.2) 0.4 (0.26) 0.42 (0.27) 0.59 (0.31) 0.73 (0.18) 0.89 (0.16)Table S12. Average Bias score (proportion of time looking at left picture)and SD (between brackets) per level of Pre-date attractiveness rating of theright picture and Gender.1234567Female 0.3 (0.27) 0.39 (0.26) 0.48 (0.27) 0.52 (0.29) 0.57 (0.28) 0.68 (0.21)Male 0.36 (0.24) 0.37 (0.2) 0.4 (0.26) 0.42 (0.27) 0.59 (0.31) 0.73 (0.18) 0.89 (0.16)Table S13. Model table for the Bayesian zero-one inflated beta regression predicting Looking time proportion to the left picture from Pre-dateattractiveness rating and Gender.Left biasPredictors Estimates CI (95%)Intercept 0.97 0.91 – 1.04phi_Intercept 5.44 4.52 – 6.56zoi_Intercept 0.02 0.01 – 0.06coi_Intercept 0.86 0.43 – 1.69AttractivenessLeft 1.39 1.34 – 1.44Gender[Female] 1.00 0.94 – 1.06AttractivenessRight 0.69 0.67 – 0.71AttractivenessLeft:Gender[Female] 0.98 0.95 – 1.02Gender[Female]:AttractivenessRight 1.01 0.98 – 1.05phi_AttractivenessLeft 0.96 0.90 – 1.02phi_Gender[Female] 0.97 0.80 – 1.17phi_AttractivenessRight 0.97 0.91 – 1.03phi_AttractivenessLeft:Gender[Female] 1.02 0.95 – 1.09phi_Gender[Female]:AttractivenessRight 1.02 0.96 – 1.09zoi_AttractivenessLeft 1.19 1.00 – 1.43zoi_Gender[Female] 1.10 0.55 – 2.21zoi_AttractivenessRight 1.58 1.32 – 1.92zoi_AttractivenessLeft:Gender[Female] 0.98 0.83 – 1.17zoi_Gender[Female]:AttractivenessRight 0.93 0.77 – 1.12coi_AttractivenessLeft 1.93 1.43 – 2.67coi_Gender[Female] 0.85 0.48 – 1.52coi_ AttractivenessRight 0.42 0.28 – 0.61coi_AttractivenessLeft:Gender[Female] 0.86 0.63 – 1.17coi_Gender[Female]:AttractivenessRight 1.40 0.96 – 2.12Random Effectsσ2 0.01τ00Subject 0.06NSubject 35Observations 1569Notes: Gender was sum-coded, while Pre-date attractiveness ratings werecentered around 4 (the middle option). Estimates for the predictors wereexponentiated, so that they represent Odds Ratios for the beta, coi and zoiparameters.Table S14. Slope estimates at different levels of Pre-date attractivenessrating (both left and right picture).pre-date attr. rating left picture Median estimate [MAD] 89% CrI pd-3 0.068 [.0028] 0.063, 0.072 1.00-2 0.077 [.0039] 0.071, 0.083 1.00-1 0.084 [.0048] 0.077, 0.092 1.000 0.087 [.0050] 0.079, 0.095 1.001 0.083 [.0044] 0.076, 0.090 1.002 0.074 [.0032] 0.069, 0.079 1.003 0.063 [.0020] 0.059, 0.066 1.00pre-date attr. rating right picture Median estimate [MAD] 89% CrI pd-3 -0.078 [.0025] -0.081, -0.073 1.00-2 -0.088 [.0038] -0.094, -0.082 1.00-1 -0.096 [.0046] -0.103, -0.088 1.000 -0.098 [.0048] -0.106, -0.091 1.001 -0.091 [.0041] -0.098, -0.085 1.002 -0.077 [.0028] -0.082, -0.073 1.003 -0.061 [.0019] -0.064, -0.058 1.00Table S15. Difference in slope between women and men at different levelsof Pre-date attractiveness rating (both left and right picture).pre-date attr. rating left picture Median estimate [MAD] 89% CrI pd-3 -.0052 [.0055] -0.014, 0.004 0.83-2 -.0075 [.0076] -0.021, 0.004 0.84-1 -.0094 [.0094] -0.025, 0.006 0.840 -.0097 [.0100] -0.026, 0.007 0.831 -.0075 [.0088] -0.021, 0.007 0.812 -.0043 [.0064] -0.015, 0.006 0.753 -.0013 [.0040] -0.008, 0.005 0.64pre-date attr. rating right picture Median estimate [MAD] 89% CrI pd-3 .000 [.005] -0.009, 0.010 0.50-2 .001 [.008] -0.014, 0.015 0.54-1 .005 [.009] -0.014, 0.022 0.700 .012 [.010] -0.006, 0.032 0.911 .013 [.008] -0.002, 0.030 0.952 .008 [.006] -0.003, 0.020 0.943 .003 [.004] -0.004, 0.011 0.82Table S14. Slope estimates at different levels of Pre-date attractivenessrating (both left and right picture).pre-date attr. rating left picture Median estimate [MAD] 89% CrI pd-3 0.068 [.0028] 0.063, 0.072 1.00-2 0.077 [.0039] 0.071, 0.083 1.00-1 0.084 [.0048] 0.077, 0.092 1.000 0.087 [.0050] 0.079, 0.095 1.001 0.083 [.0044] 0.076, 0.090 1.002 0.074 [.0032] 0.069, 0.079 1.003 0.063 [.0020] 0.059, 0.066 1.00pre-date attr. rating right picture Median estimate [MAD] 89% CrI pd-3 -0.078 [.0025] -0.081, -0.073 1.00-2 -0.088 [.0038] -0.094, -0.082 1.00-1 -0.096 [.0046] -0.103, -0.088 1.000 -0.098 [.0048] -0.106, -0.091 1.001 -0.091 [.0041] -0.098, -0.085 1.002 -0.077 [.0028] -0.082, -0.073 1.003 -0.061 [.0019] -0.064, -0.058 1.00Table S15. Difference in slope between women and men at different levelsof Pre-date attractiveness rating (both left and right picture).pre-date attr. rating left picture Median estimate [MAD] 89% CrI pd-3 -.0052 [.0055] -0.014, 0.004 0.83-2 -.0075 [.0076] -0.021, 0.004 0.84-1 -.0094 [.0094] -0.025, 0.006 0.840 -.0097 [.0100] -0.026, 0.007 0.831 -.0075 [.0088] -0.021, 0.007 0.812 -.0043 [.0064] -0.015, 0.006 0.753 -.0013 [.0040] -0.008, 0.005 0.64pre-date attr. rating right picture Median estimate [MAD] 89% CrI pd-3 .000 [.005] -0.009, 0.010 0.50-2 .001 [.008] -0.014, 0.015 0.54-1 .005 [.009] -0.014, 0.022 0.700 .012 [.010] -0.006, 0.032 0.911 .013 [.008] -0.002, 0.030 0.952 .008 [.006] -0.003, 0.020 0.943 .003 [.004] -0.004, 0.011 0.82Iliana Samara 17x24.indd 188 08-04-2024 16:37