Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1893/26503
Appears in Collections:Psychology Journal Articles
Peer Review Status: Refereed
Title: How valid are assessments of conception probability in ovulatory cycle research? Evaluations, recommendations, and theoretical implications
Author(s): Gangestad, Steven W
Haselton, Martie G
Welling, Lisa L M
Gildersleeve, Kelly
Pillsworth, Elizabeth G
Burriss, Robert
Larson, Christina M
Puts, David A
Keywords: Menstrual cycle
Evolutionary psychology
Fertility
Fertile phase
Ovarian cycle
Issue Date: Mar-2016
Citation: Gangestad SW, Haselton MG, Welling LLM, Gildersleeve K, Pillsworth EG, Burriss R, Larson CM & Puts DA (2016) How valid are assessments of conception probability in ovulatory cycle research? Evaluations, recommendations, and theoretical implications, Evolution and Human Behavior, 37 (2), pp. 85-96.
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.
DOI Link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2015.09.001
Rights: Accepted refereed manuscript of: Gangestad SW, Haselton MG, Welling LLM, Gildersleeve K, Pillsworth EG, Burriss R, Larson CM & Puts DA (2016) How valid are assessments of conception probability in ovulatory cycle research? Evaluations, recommendations, and theoretical implications, Evolution and Human Behavior, 37 (2), pp. 85-96. DOI: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2015.09.001 © 2015, Elsevier. Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
gangestad 15ip cycle methods EHB.pdf7.86 MBAdobe PDFView/Open



This item is protected by original copyright



Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact library@stir.ac.uk providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.