Sentence examples for reducing suggestions from inspiring English sources

Participants' crime reducing suggestions were coded blindly by two coders.

Seven (3%) crime-reducing suggestions and 18 (7%) police officer interpretations were not coded.

Crime-reducing suggestions were coded into two groups (reform and enforcement) as they were in Experiment 1.

In this experiment, we found that crime-reducing suggestions differed systematically as a function of the metaphor used to frame the crime problem.

This afforded us a clearer interpretation of their crime-reducing suggestions and boosted our power to detect the influence of the metaphor.

Inter-rater reliability was high for both: Cohen's kappa for crime-reducing suggestions was.86 (p<.001); Cohen's kappa for interpretations of the role of a police officer was.72 (p<.721).72

The results of Experiment 3, however, suggest that the population does not seem to favor either of the two crime-reducing suggestions absent a metaphoric frame and that both frames are influential.

Comparing the results from Experiments 2 and 3 we find an interaction between the form in which the word "beast" or "virus" is presented (i.e., metaphor vs. lexical prime) and the extent to which crime-reducing suggestions are congruent with the prime.

In Experiment 3, unlike Experiments 1 and 2, there was no difference in crime-reducing suggestions as a function of the condition – i.e., whether the participant listed a synonym to "virus" or "beast" before reading the crime paragraph did not affect what solutions they suggested to the crime problem.

This question aimed to disambiguate the modal crime-reducing suggestion from Experiment 1, which was "increase the police force".

Rather than asking participants to make a crime-reducing suggestion as in previous studies, the task in Experiment 4 was to select an area to investigate further (in preparation to making a crime-fighting suggestion).