Search alternatives:
significant decrease » significant increase (Expand Search), significantly increased (Expand Search)
significant factor » significant factors (Expand Search)
significant decrease » significant increase (Expand Search), significantly increased (Expand Search)
significant factor » significant factors (Expand Search)
-
1261
-
1262
-
1263
-
1264
-
1265
-
1266
Summary of significance levels for comparison of surgical segment ROM between different test groups.
Published 2025Subjects: -
1267
Percentage trends in intimate partner sexual violence against women by survey year.
Published 2025Subjects: -
1268
-
1269
Descriptive statistics of alcohol consumption in G7 countries (in litres/capita).
Published 2024Subjects: -
1270
-
1271
-
1272
-
1273
-
1274
-
1275
-
1276
-
1277
Preference for the EIA – conjoint results.
Published 2025“…When are individuals more likely to support equal treatment algorithms (ETAs), characterized by higher predictive accuracy, and when do they prefer equal impact algorithms (EIAs) that reduce performance gaps between groups? A randomized conjoint experiment and a follow-up choice experiment revealed that support for the EIAs decreased sharply as their accuracy gap grew, although impact parity was prioritized more when ETAs produced large outcome discrepancies. …”
-
1278
Marginal means – Pooled across scenarios.
Published 2025“…When are individuals more likely to support equal treatment algorithms (ETAs), characterized by higher predictive accuracy, and when do they prefer equal impact algorithms (EIAs) that reduce performance gaps between groups? A randomized conjoint experiment and a follow-up choice experiment revealed that support for the EIAs decreased sharply as their accuracy gap grew, although impact parity was prioritized more when ETAs produced large outcome discrepancies. …”
-
1279
Sample attribute table.
Published 2025“…When are individuals more likely to support equal treatment algorithms (ETAs), characterized by higher predictive accuracy, and when do they prefer equal impact algorithms (EIAs) that reduce performance gaps between groups? A randomized conjoint experiment and a follow-up choice experiment revealed that support for the EIAs decreased sharply as their accuracy gap grew, although impact parity was prioritized more when ETAs produced large outcome discrepancies. …”
-
1280
Subgroup analysis – Political affiliation.
Published 2025“…When are individuals more likely to support equal treatment algorithms (ETAs), characterized by higher predictive accuracy, and when do they prefer equal impact algorithms (EIAs) that reduce performance gaps between groups? A randomized conjoint experiment and a follow-up choice experiment revealed that support for the EIAs decreased sharply as their accuracy gap grew, although impact parity was prioritized more when ETAs produced large outcome discrepancies. …”