Data Entry: Please note that the research database will be replaced by UNIverse by the end of October 2023. Please enter your data into the system https://universe-intern.unibas.ch. Thanks

Login for users with Unibas email account...

Login for registered users without Unibas email account...

 
How valid are assessments of conception probability in ovulatory cycle research? Evaluations, recommendations, and theoretical implications
JournalArticle (Originalarbeit in einer wissenschaftlichen Zeitschrift)
 
ID 3693530
Author(s) Gangestad, S. W.; Haselton, M. G.; Welling, L. L. M.; Gildersleeve, K.; Pillsworth, E. G.; Burriss, R. P.; Larson, C. M.; Puts, D. A.
Author(s) at UniBasel Burriss, Robert
Year 2016
Title How valid are assessments of conception probability in ovulatory cycle research? Evaluations, recommendations, and theoretical implications
Journal Evolution and Human Behavior
Volume 37
Number 2
Pages / Article-Number 85-96
Keywords Menstrual cycle; Evolutionary psychology; Fertility; Fertile phase; Ovarian cycle
Abstract Over the past two decades, a large literature examining psychological changes across women's ovulatory cycles has accumulated, emphasizing comparisons between fertile and non-fertile phases of the cycle. While some studies have verified ovulation using luteinizing hormone (LH) tests, counting methods - assessments of conception probability based on counting forward from actual or retrospectively recalled onset of last menses, or backward from actual or anticipated onset of next menses - are more common. The validity of these methods remains largely unexplored. Based on published data on the distributions of the lengths of follicular and luteal phases, we created a sample of 58,000+ simulated cycles. We used the sample to assess the validity of counting methods. Aside from methods that count backward from a confirmed onset of next menses, validities are modest, generally ranging from about .40-.55. We offer power estimates and make recommendations for future work. We also discuss implications for interpreting past research.
Publisher Elsevier
ISSN/ISBN 1090-5138 ; 1879-0607
edoc-URL http://edoc.unibas.ch/51871/
Full Text on edoc No
Digital Object Identifier DOI 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2015.09.001
ISI-Number WOS:000370888300001
Document type (ISI) Article
 
   

MCSS v5.8 PRO. 0.342 sec, queries - 0.000 sec ©Universität Basel  |  Impressum   |    
10/05/2024