New conception off sociosexuality also offers feel checked out

With regards to the “constant concept of considering quick-identity and you will enough time-title mating once the not being opposite posts”, we currently introduced this idea in the last types of the fresh new manuscript (today inside pp. 4-5, lines 91-108):

That it traditional look at mating orientation has been slammed of the certain people, like Jackson and you will Kirkpatrick , which stated one to quick-title and much time-label orientation will not need to getting other posts, but size one to, when you find yourself adversely associated, can be classified. Other boffins show this new appropriateness out-of abandoning new classic unidimensional stance regarding small-identity orientations and you will hearing a great multidimensional direction . elizabeth., earlier sociosexual conclusion), attitudes (i.e., opinions regarding the everyday sex), and you will appeal (i.e., arousal because of possibility of relaxed gender). However, it’s still prominent that experts always data mating actions particularly opposing posts and you will sociosexuality of a beneficial unidimensional strategy when they familiarize yourself with group correlates.

“A condition to be a good solution is that relationship software profiles https://datingranking.net/nl/passion-overzicht/ is enough time-identity dependent otherwise, at the very least, for as long-identity depending as standard population.” It matter is none be handled, neither answered about shot, pick second point.

Response: Adopting the the testimonial i’ve changed it phrase (pp. 5-6, outlines 128-130): “A condition to be a solution is that matchmaking programs users try a lot of time-term depending otherwise, no less than, as long-term created since low-users”. But not, i have perhaps not was able to discover the “2nd section” which was highly relevant to this problem. Hence, i just altered this issue regarding your earliest the main reviewer’s feedback.

A primary point ‘s the saying for generalizability of your own try while you are there have been a couple exceptions made: Once: Decades are minimal out of 18 to 26.

Response: Many thanks for your feedback. The audience is unsure on what ‘s the trouble with the past attempt decades. From our insights, there are 2 options. First, our decide to try cannot be general to all or any population. I totally trust that it. That is why as to why, currently in the last kind of brand new manuscript, we within the Talk section (today during the p. 15, contours 336-340):

Almost every other limits was about the representativeness of attempt and the brand new generalization of one’s results. One of the last people, the newest decide to try are generally females, old anywhere between 18 and you can twenty-six, unmarried and you can from a single school, putting some overall performance tough to generalize to all students and, still faster in order to more youthful non-college students.

2nd, if for example the problem is so you can ban those people additional that age range, which decision was made to be uniform and you will defined on inclusion standards out-of previous training used which have college or university examples (find, including: Barrada ainsi que al., 2018; Barrada ainsi que al., 2019; Castro and you may Santos-Iglesias, 2016; Castro et al., 2020; Fernandez del Rio mais aussi al., 2019). This seems throughout the breakdown of your study’s addition standards (now, in p. 6, lines 144-19). I chose to be consistent round the knowledge to reduce researchers’ level off freedom and you will, ergo, end possible p-hacking. This new exception to this rule conditions about the ages is preset and you can uniform throughout our knowledge.

For example sociosexual conclusion (we

Second: Merely someone considering by themselves given that men or women were found in the brand new analyses (nevertheless they would-be decrease and considered as shed about regression).

Ergo, for example, you are able to desire a steady relationships and you may, while you are seeking they, look after numerous intimate matchmaking in the place of commitment [twenty-seven,28]

Response: As for people who don’t pick themselves due to the fact guys or women, as well as be seen throughout the part Members (now, inside the p. 6, outlines 144-19), there were 13 people from an initial decide to try of just one,996, which signifies 0.65% of these take to. Due to the small size of this shot out of participants (currently tiny in advance of most other exemption standards was basically used), it was ple. Having such a restricted take to size, statistical stamina is really low. And additionally, this isn’t it is possible to to combine this group which have some of the two vast majority intercourse identities.