publication bias or selective reporting account for findings consistent with the ovulatory shift hypothesis. Disclosure of Information Used to Create P-curves Table of Contents 1. Selection Criteria 2. P-curve disclosure table: Effects evaluating Cycle Shift Prediction and Context Moderation Prediction 2a. Included studies 2b. References 3. P-curve summary tables of test-statistics, df, reported and recalculated p values for effects evaluating Cycle Shift Prediction and Context Moderation Prediction 4. P-curve disclosure table: Effects evaluating Partner Qualities Moderation Prediction 4a. Included studies 4b. References 5. P-curve summary tables of test-statistics, df, reported and recalculated p values for effects evaluating Partner Qualities Moderation Prediction 6. P-curves 6a. P-curve of reported p values (16 in total) evaluating Cycle Shift Prediction and Context Moderation Prediction 6b. P-curve of reported p values (24 in total) evaluating Cycle Shift Prediction, Context Moderation Prediction, and Partner Qualities Moderation Prediction (more conservative) 6c. P-curve of reported p values (26 in total) evaluating Cycle Shift Prediction, Context Moderation Prediction, and Partner Qualities Moderation Prediction (less conservative) 6d. P-curve of exact p values (22 in total) evaluating Cycle Shift Prediction, Context Moderation Prediction, and Partner Qualities Moderation Prediction (less conservative) 6e. P-curve of reported p values (12 in total) evaluating Cycle Shift Prediction 6f. P-curve of exact two-tailed p values (12 in total) evaluating Cycle Shift Prediction 6g. P-curve of reported p values (8 in total) evaluating Partner Qualities Moderation Prediction (more conservative) 6h. P-curve of exact two-tailed p values (6 in total) evaluating Partner Qualities Moderation Prediction (more conservative)
2. P-curve disclosure table: Effects evaluating Cycle Shift Prediction and Context Moderation Prediction 2a. Included studies Original paper Quoted text from original paper indicating prediction of interest to researchers Study design Quoted text from original paper with statistical results Results Gangestad, Simpson, Cousins, & (2004) “On the basis of the theory that these behavioral displays partly reflect (and signal) broadly defined condition (see Thornhill & Gangestad, 1999a), we predicted that during fertile days, women would prefer the displays in short-term mates more than in long-term mates, but during nonfertile days, this difference between mating contexts would not occur.” (p. 204) fertility (continuous) x composite predicting attraction “With short-term mating attractiveness as the dependent variable, a predicted Conception Risk X SP-DIC Composite interaction emerged, t(7677) = 2.58, p = .010; as expected, this interaction was not significant when long-term mating attractiveness was the dependent variable, t(7677) = n.s.” (p. 206) t(7677) = 2.58, p = .010 fertility (continuous) x social presence x relationship context (short-term vs. long-term) predicting attraction “Additional follow-up analyses revealed that, entered independently, both Social Presence and Direct Intrasexual Competitiveness interacted with conception risk and mating context to predict attractiveness ratings, t(7672) = 2.10 and 2.21, respectively, p = .036 and .027 (Table 1).” (p. 206) t(7672) = 2.10, p = .036a fertility (continuous) x direct intrasexual competitiveness x relationship context (short-term vs. long-term) predicting attraction t(7672) = 2.21, p = .027a
preferences for facial cues of men’s testosterone when tested inside the estimated fertile window than when tested outside this window…” (p. 743) cues of testosterone tested inside the estimated fertile window (mean z = 0.19 ± 0.27; mean raw percentage of high testosterone faces chosen = 52%) than when tested in their other session (mean z = -0.28 ± 0.18; mean raw percentage of high testosterone faces chosen = 43%), F (1, 17) = 4.84, p = 0.043.” (p. 7460 Thornhill & Gangestad (1999) “…a previous study by the authors provided data supporting the hypothesis that olfactory stimuli pertaining to men’s phenotypic and genetic quality, measured by degree of body FA, positively affect men’s sexual attrac- tiveness to women (Gangestad and Thornhill 1998a)…. First, we wished to see if the first study would replicate and thereby assess the reliability of its main finding using a larger sample. Second,... in this study we examined whether women prefer the scents of visually attractive men (based on facial photographs) as well as symmetric men.” (p. 178) Correlation between fertility (continuous) and attraction to scents associated with symmetry “Normally ovulating women’s preference for symmetry was correlated with estimated fertility risk based on women’s day in the menstrual cycle. The correlation was highly significant, r = .43, p = .001 (N = 48).” (p. 186) r = .43, p = .001 Thornhill, Chapman, & Gangestad “In the current study, we examined changes in women’s preferences for the scent of high-T men across the ovulatory Correlation between fertility (continuous) and attraction to scents “Conception risk did covary significantly and positively with male scents associated with T levels, r46 = .32, p = .016.” (p. 219) r46 = .32, p = .016
(2013) cycle using a larger sample of men (46) and procedures used in studies examining women’s preferences for scents associated with men’s symmetry.” (p. 217) associated with testosterone levels Thornhill, Gangestad, Miller, Scheyd, & Franklin (2003) “Based on this notion, Gangestad and Thornhill (1998b) proposed that olfactory stimuli pertaining to men’s phenotypic and genetic quality, measured by degree of body FA, positively affects men’s scent attractiveness to women, particularly during the fertile phase of the cycle when expressed preference for offspring’s sire is critical.” (p. 669) Correlation between fertility (continuous) and attraction to scents associated with symmetry “Consistent with previous studies, women’s preference for symmetry was predicted by their fertility status (r = .269, directed p = .019).” (p. 673) r = .269, directed p = .019 a Not included in p-curve due to non-independence.
a Not included in p curve due to non-independence. b Windsorized to .01 for tests of right skew. c Not included in p-curve because exact p > .05. d Not included in “More Conservative” p-curve.
6. P-curves 6a. P-curve of reported p values (16 in total) evaluating the Cycle Shift Prediction and Context Moderation Prediction. 6b. P-curve of reported p values (24 in total) evaluating Cycle Shift Prediction, Context Moderation Prediction, and Partner Qualities Moderation Prediction (more conservative) 6c. P-curve of reported p values (26 in total) evaluating Cycle Shift Prediction, Context Moderation Prediction, and Partner Qualities Moderation Prediction (less conservative) 6d. P-curve of exact p values (22 in total) evaluating Cycle Shift Prediction, Context Moderation Prediction, and Partner Qualities Moderation Prediction (less conservative) 6e. P-curve of reported p values (12 in total) evaluating Cycle Shift Prediction 6f. P-curve of exact two-tailed p values (12 in total) evaluating Cycle Shift Prediction