@misc{SchusterTomaszewskaMarchewkaetal.2020,
  author    = {Schuster, Isabell and Tomaszewska, Paulina and Marchewka, Juliette and Krah{\´e}, Barbara},
  title     = {Does question format matter in assessing the prevalence of sexual aggression?},
  series = {Zweitver{\"o}ffentlichungen der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  journal   = {Zweitver{\"o}ffentlichungen der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  number    = {4},
  issn      = {1866-8364},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-54663},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-546632},
  pages     = {13},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {As research on sexual aggression has been growing, methodological issues in assessing prevalence rates have received increased attention. Building on work by Abbey and colleagues about effects of question format, participants in this study (1,253; 621 female; 632 male) were randomly assigned to one of two versions of the Sexual Aggression and Victimization Scale (SAV-S). In Version 1, the coercive tactic (use/threat of physical force, exploitation of the inability to resist, verbal pressure) was presented first, and sexual acts (sexual touch, attempted and completed sexual intercourse, other sexual acts) were presented as subsequent questions. In Version 2, sexual acts were presented first, and coercive tactics as subsequent questions. No version effects emerged for overall perpetration rates reported by men and women. The overall victimization rate across all items was significantly higher in the tactic-first than in the sexual-act-first conditions for women, but not for men. Classifying participants by their most severe experience of sexual victimization showed that fewer women were in the nonvictim category and more men were in the nonconsensual sexual contact category when the coercive tactic was presented first. Sexual experience background did not moderate the findings. The implications for the measurement of self-reported sexual aggression victimization and perpetration are discussed.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{SchusterTomaszewskaMarchewkaetal.2020,
  author    = {Schuster, Isabell and Tomaszewska, Paulina and Marchewka, Juliette and Krah{\´e}, Barbara},
  title     = {Does question format matter in assessing the prevalence of sexual aggression?},
  series = {The journal of sex research},
  volume    = {58},
  journal   = {The journal of sex research},
  number    = {4},
  publisher = {Routledge, Taylor \& Francis Group},
  address   = {Abingdon},
  issn      = {0022-4499},
  doi       = {10.1080/00224499.2020.1777927},
  pages     = {502 -- 511},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {As research on sexual aggression has been growing, methodological issues in assessing prevalence rates have received increased attention. Building on work by Abbey and colleagues about effects of question format, participants in this study (1,253; 621 female; 632 male) were randomly assigned to one of two versions of the Sexual Aggression and Victimization Scale (SAV-S). In Version 1, the coercive tactic (use/threat of physical force, exploitation of the inability to resist, verbal pressure) was presented first, and sexual acts (sexual touch, attempted and completed sexual intercourse, other sexual acts) were presented as subsequent questions. In Version 2, sexual acts were presented first, and coercive tactics as subsequent questions. No version effects emerged for overall perpetration rates reported by men and women. The overall victimization rate across all items was significantly higher in the tactic-first than in the sexual-act-first conditions for women, but not for men. Classifying participants by their most severe experience of sexual victimization showed that fewer women were in the nonvictim category and more men were in the nonconsensual sexual contact category when the coercive tactic was presented first. Sexual experience background did not moderate the findings. The implications for the measurement of self-reported sexual aggression victimization and perpetration are discussed.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Kuettner2020,
  author    = {K{\"u}ttner, Uwe-Alexander},
  title     = {Tying sequences together with the [that's + wh-clause] format},
  series = {Research on language and social interaction},
  volume    = {53},
  journal   = {Research on language and social interaction},
  number    = {2},
  publisher = {Routledge, Taylor \& Francis Group},
  address   = {New York},
  issn      = {0835-1813},
  doi       = {10.1080/08351813.2020.1739422},
  pages     = {247 -- 270},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {This article explores a sequence organizational phenomenon that results from the use of a loosely specifiable turn format (viz., That's + wh-clause) for launching (next) sequences while at the same time connecting back to a prior turn. Using this practice creates a sequential juncture, i.e., a pivot-like nexus between one sequence and a next. In third position, such junctures serve to accomplish seamless sequential transitions from one sequence into a next by presenting the latter as locally occasioned. The practice may, however, also be deployed in second position to launch actions that have not been made relevant or provided for by the preceding action and exhibit response relevance themselves. The sequential junctures then become retro-sequential in character: They transform the projected trajectory of the sequence in progress and create interlocking sequential structures. These findings highlight that sequence is practice, while pointing to understudied interconnections between tying and sequentiality. Data are in English.},
  language  = {en}
}