Statistical analysis

The raw (non-transformed) RT data is presented in Figure 12. The transformed RT data was subjected to a 2 (Group: low aggression or moderate aggression) x 2 (Context: literal or sarcastic) x 2 (Question Type: factual or attitude) x 2 (Question Order: first or second) mixed effects ANOVA for participants (F1) and items (F2). All significant main effects and interactions were investigated further with Newman-Keuls post-hoc tests (p<.05). Literal Attitude Q2 1771.80 (529.43) .91 (.51) -.26 (.99) Sarcastic Factual Q1 1622.94 (387.68) .3 (.51) -1.47 (.99) Sarcastic Factual Q2 1440.93 (341.96) .4 (.51) -.63 (.99) Sarcastic Attitude Q1 1916.11 (726.81) .69 (.51) -.85 (.99) Sarcastic Attitude Q2 1797.32 (693.54) .59 (.51) -.88 (.99)

Figure 12. Mean reaction time data (with standard error) for the low and moderate aggression groups

The ANOVA for the transformed RT data revealed no main effect of group or group interactions. Main effects of Context [F1(1,38)=7.17, p<.05, ηp2=.16; F2(1,224)=2.44, p=.12, ηp2=.01], Question Type [F1(1,38)=51.56, p<.01, ηp2=.58; F2(1,224)=122.9, p<.01, ηp2=.35], and Question Order [F1(1,38)=32.59, p<.01, ηp2=.46; F2(1,224)=18.27, p<.01, ηp2=.08], were observed, along with a two-way significant interaction of Context x Question Type [F1(1,38)=22.31, p<.01, ηp2=.37; F2(1,224)=2.17, p=.15, ηp2=.01], and a significant three-way interaction of Context x Question Type x Question Order

[F1(1,38)=5.11, p<.05, ηp2=.12; F2(1,224)=1.38, p=.24, ηp2=.01].

Newman-Keuls (p<.05) post-hoc analyses demonstrated the following in relation to the main effects and interactions. With regards to Context, RTs were faster in the literal than the sarcastic condition (p<.01). Looking at Question Type, RTs were faster for factual than attitude questions (p<.01). Finally, considering Question Order, RTs were faster for questions coming second than those coming first (p<.01). In terms of the Context x Question Type interaction, RTs were faster on factual questions in the literal context (p<.01), and there was no difference in RTs on attitude questions between the two contexts. In terms of the three-way interaction of Context x Question Type x Question Order, on factual questions in the literal context there was no significant difference in RTs between the questions ordered first or second. On attitude questions in the literal context, factual questions in the sarcastic context and attitude questions in the sarcastic context, RTs were significantly faster for the questions ordered second (all p<.01).

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 Q1 Q2 Q1 Q2 Q1 Q2 Q1 Q2

Factual Attitude Factual Attitude

Literal Sarcastic Mea n reactio n tine (ms)

3.2.2.2.1 Additional reaction time analysis

As was the case for Experiment One, additional analyses were conducted on a subset of the vignettes for which the word count of factual and attitude questions were statistically similar, in an attempt to control for any effects of question length and therefore reading time. As in Experiment One, the data from the sample of 23 attitude and 23 factual questions were looked at.

This smaller data set was considered for parametric analysis. As in the larger analysis, outliers were present (three data values greater than 1.5 box-lengths from the edge of the box) and the data set violated both the normality assumption (both according to skewness and kurtosis scores, and the Shapiro-Wilk test), and also the homogeneity of variance assumption (according to the Levene’s test). Consequently, the data were Log

transformed in line with the procedure in the full data set analysis. Once the data was Log transformed outliers were no longer present and the assumption of normality was fully satisfied (according to skewness and kurtosis scores, and the Shapiro-Wilk test). With regards to the homogeneity of variance, the Levene’s test results suggested the data transformation was successful in reducing the heterogeneity of the variance, with all but one within-subject factors being non-significant at the p<.05 level, and one factor significant at the p<.05 level but not the p<.01 level. This transformed data was therefore considered suitable for parametric analysis. The raw (non-transformed) data is presented in Figure 13.

The 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 repeated measures ANOVA yielded no main effect of Group (as was found in the main analysis) but main effects of Context [F(1,38)=21.16, p<.01, ηp2=.36], Question Type [F(1,38)=91.08, p<.01, ηp2=.71], and Question Order [F(1,38)=38.88, p<.01, ηp2=.51]. In addition, a significant interaction of Context x Question Type [F(1,38)=33.63, p<.01, ηp2=.47] was seen as well as a Question Type x Question Order interaction [F(1,38)=4.63, p<.05, ηp2=.11]. Finally, a significant three way interaction of Context x Question Type x Question Order was produced [F(1,38)=24.24, p<.01, ηp2

=.39].

Overall, then, the findings in this subset of the data largely mirrored the findings of the analyses of the full data, confirming further the differences observed between the factual and attitude questions in the full analyses.

Figure 13. Mean reaction time data (with standard error) for low and moderate aggression groups, on a smaller subset of questions statistically similar in length

3.2.3 Error analysis

The error rates across Context, Question Type and Question Order for both the low and moderate aggression groups are displayed in Figure 14. As can be seen, error rates overall were very low, in line with the low error rates seen for the control group of Experiment One. The error data was considered for suitability for parametric analysis; on initial inspection outliers were present and data was non-normally distributed. The data was collapsed across the Question Order factor and still did not meet parametric assumptions. Due to many zero data points (where no errors were made), the data were not suitable for transformation. As a result of the violation of parametric assumptions, non-parametric Mann-Whitney U tests and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were conducted to look for differences between the groups and on the within-subjects factors, respectively.

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 Q1 Q2 Q1 Q2 Q1 Q2 Q1 Q2

Factual Attitude Factual Attitude

Literal Sarcastic Mea n reactio n tine (ms)

Figure 14. Percentage of factual and total attitude errors (with standard error), for low and moderate aggression groups

The Mann-Whitney U test found no significant differences in the number of errors made overall (collapsed across Context, Question Type and Question Order) between the low and moderate aggression groups [U=161.5, p=.29]. There were also no significant differences between the groups on total number of literal errors made [U=151.5, p=.16], total sarcastic errors made [U=186.5, p=.7], total factual question errors [U=163.5, p=.3] or total attitude question errors [U=166.5, p=.33]. Within the low aggression group, the Wilcoxon signed-rank test found no significant differences between the number of errors made in the sarcastic context and the literal context [Z=-.44, p=.66], or between the factual questions and the attitude questions [Z=-1.25, p=.21]. Within the moderate aggression group, again there were no significant differences in errors made between the two contexts [Z=-1.41, p=.16] or between the two question types [Z=-.36, p=.72].