Response: We have been sorry but have perhaps not managed to fully understand this remark. When you look at the outlines 276-277, i fret a robust seeking centered on early in the day literary works: you can find differences in mating direction according to intimate positioning. As well, because starred in the initial distribution on malfunction out of the sociodemographic software utilized (now, in p. seven, outlines 178-180), i’ve inquired about intimate positioning and different answers got (heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, other; maybe not „maybe not totally heterosexual”). We feel that intimate positioning might have been given the advantages it deserves: its importance could have been warranted about addition, the outcomes based on it was indeed mentioned in the new dialogue, and has now been recognized on constraints of your analysis you to definitely grouping heterosexuals/intimate minorities along with her setting a loss of money and you will information on the particular means homosexuals and you may bisexuals work.
It means: Ab muscles limited sounding more youthful, studying, hetero- or low-heterosexual someone is not simple to feel generalized past ourtime by itself also it dont address the questions concerning long-identity positioning differences of your populace and never address they during the itself.
Response: Again, i’ve got troubles to fully comprehend the opinion. Employing the various introduction/exception to this rule standards is actually better-warranted on the manuscript. Many of these elements (but the fresh non-detection of people, which is already informed me about point People) are talked about on the restrictions of investigation, taking your functions of one’s shot and of the inclusion/exception to this rule conditions may affect the fresh new generalization of overall performance. I never made an effort to expose our test because associate about general people, therefore we do not know what’s the part right here.
Response: We have been sorry however, we also provide had problems to fully understand this opinion. Thus, we do not make change in the newest manuscript from it procedure.
Apparently, whoever „logged towards the no less than one of around three most put matchmaking software inside the Germany in the last one year” (p
Next: The newest limited many years span is quite a categorical than just a good metric varying and therefore overemphasizing prospective aftereffects of age.
So, again, the partnership status whenever study have been built-up may or possibly exactly the same throughout the position for the prior 1 year
Response: Out of a mathematical perspective, we do not know very well what brand new customer is trying to indicate right here. Ages, at this point, try an adjustable portrayed within the a proportion scale, which have nine different options, regarding 18, 19, 20. so you can twenty-six. What is actually obvious is that the difference between 18 and 19 many years is exactly the real difference out-of twenty-five to help you twenty six age. Which equivalence from length ranging from adjoining scores is not property of categorical details, so we never agree with the reviewer’s question.
Members of a love are usually normal relationship app profiles (Freyth & Batinic, 2021; Hobbs et al, 2017; Le), relationship Grindr that is thought in order to, as more matchmaking are believed become open. Freyth & Batinic subsequent could not select a difference of your relationship position out-of using and not-playing with dating applications, but also no difference in real relationships app using choices.
Response: Thank you so much truly for the feedback. We have been not knowing on which the brand new customer anticipates us to customize from the considering that it remark.
– Le). While the Lefebvre means the way exactly how she examined relationships updates is actually maybe not an indication out-of matchmaking reputation while using Tinder: „players classified their latest relationships standing (may/may not reflect their position when using Tinder)” (p. 1211).
– Freyth and Batinic (2021). It is unsure for us and that time these authors used to take on men dating software user. 3), though it are unsure in the event it describes merely monitored participants or even to most of the people.