Common use of Study Design Clause in Contracts

Study Design. The goal of this study was to investigate the association between peer status and friendship quality and the mediating role of empathy and prosocial behavior in this association. Because friendship is a dyadic concept involving two friends our study employed a dyadic design using information from both friends. Accordingly, we used the Actor Partner Interdependence Model (APIM) for the analysis of dyadic data (Xxxxx & Xxxxx, 2000; Xxxxx & Acitelli, 2001; Xxxxx, Xxxxxxxx, Xxxxxx, Xxxx, & Xxxxx, 2002). The APIM includes two types of effects. The actor effect (path a in Figure 1) is the effect of adolescents’ peer status on their own friendship quality rat- ings. The partner effect (path p) is the effect of adolescents’ peer status on their friends’ friendship quality ratings. For example, popular adolescents might rate the quality of their own friendships highly (actor effect), and their friends also might rate the quality of their friendship highly (partner effect). The APIM simultaneously estimates the coefficients for all paths, with the two paths a and two paths b in Figure 1 set equal due to indistinguishabil- ity of dyad members (mutual friends) in this study. An extension of this model is the Actor–Partner Interdependence Mediation Model (APIMeM) (Xxxxxxxxx, Xxxxx, & Xxxxx, 2011). The APIMeM allows for testing of mediation effects within the actor and partner paths. While the APIM is a technique to examine associations between the characteristics of the two members of a dyad, it does not explain why these associations occur. With two members in a dyad, characteristics of both dyad members can be (partly) responsible for existing actor and partner effects. Using APIMeM, it is possible to differentiate between actor mediators and partner mediators on either actor or partner paths. Figure 2 shows the resulting four different mediation paths: actor–actor (aA1–bA1 and aA2–bA2), partner–partner (aP1–bP2 and aP2–bP1), actor–partner (aA1–bP2 and aA2–bP1), and partner–actor (aP1–bA1 and aP2–bA2) mediation. For example: the link between friend A’s peer status and friend A’s friendship perception may be explained by their own prosocial behavior (actor–actor mediation). This link also may be explained by friend B’s prosocial behavior (partner–partner mediation). The link between an friend A’s peer status and FIGURE 1 The actor-partner interdependence model (Xxxxx & Acitelli, 2001) friend B’s friendship perception similarly may be explained by friend A’s prosocial behavior (actor–partner mediation) or friend B’s prosocial behavior (partner–actor mediation). Note that dyad members in this study are indistinguishable and therefore each dyad member could be either friend A or friend B.

Study Design. The goal of this study was to investigate the association between peer status and friendship quality and the mediating role of empathy and prosocial behavior in this association. Because friendship is a dyadic concept involving two friends our study employed a dyadic design using information from both friends. Accordingly, we used the Actor Partner Interdependence Model (APIM) for the analysis of dyadic data (Xxxxx & Xxxxx, 2000; Xxxxx & Acitelli, 2001; Xxxxx, Xxxxxxxx, Xxxxxx, Xxxx, & Xxxxx, 2002). The APIM includes two types of effectseffects. The actor effect (path a in Figure 1) is the effect effect of adolescents’ peer status on their own friendship quality rat- ings. The partner effect (path p) is the effect effect of adolescents’ peer status on their friends’ friendship quality ratings. For example, popular adolescents might rate the quality of their own friendships highly (actor effecteffect), and their friends also might rate the quality of their friendship highly (partner effecteffect). The APIM simultaneously estimates the coefficients for all paths, with the two paths a and two paths b in Figure 1 set equal due to indistinguishabil- ity of dyad members (mutual friends) in this study. An extension of this model is the Actor–Partner Interdependence Mediation Model (APIMeM) (Xxxxxxxxx, Xxxxx, & Xxxxx, 2011). The APIMeM allows for testing of mediation effects effects within the actor and partner paths. While the APIM is a technique to examine associations between the characteristics of the two members of a dyad, it does not explain why these associations occur. With two members in a dyad, characteristics of both dyad members can be (partly) responsible for existing actor and partner effectseffects. Using APIMeM, it is possible to differentiate differentiate between actor mediators and partner mediators on either actor or partner paths. Figure 2 shows the resulting four different different mediation paths: actor–actor (aA1–bA1 and aA2–bA2), partner–partner (aP1–bP2 and aP2–bP1), actor–partner (aA1–bP2 and aA2–bP1), and partner–actor (aP1–bA1 and aP2–bA2) mediation. For example: the link between friend A’s peer status and friend A’s friendship perception may be explained by their own prosocial behavior (actor–actor mediation). This link also may be explained by friend B’s prosocial behavior (partner–partner mediation). The link between an friend A’s peer status and FIGURE 1 The actor-partner interdependence model (Xxxxx & Acitelli, 2001) friend B’s friendship perception similarly may be explained by friend A’s prosocial behavior (actor–partner mediation) or friend B’s prosocial behavior (partner–actor mediation). Note that dyad members in this study are indistinguishable and therefore each dyad member could be either friend A or friend B.