Skip to main content
. 2020 Feb 4;32(1):36–50. doi: 10.1080/08995605.2019.1652487

Table 6.

Final proportional hazards regression results for medical/physical-related attrition.

Model Fit
Step 3 Predictor Statistics
Model df −2LL Δ-2LL Predictor β HR HR 95% LL HR 95% UL
Step 1 1 142,159.82 AFQT −0.167 0.846 0.816 0.878
Step 2 11 141,650.35 509.47 Attention Seeking −0.048 0.953 0.927 0.979
Step 3 15 141,609.43 40.92 Dominance −0.036 0.965 0.929 1.001
        Even-tempered −0.071 0.932 0.897 0.967
        Intellectual Efficiency 0.063 1.065 1.035 1.096
        Non-Delinquency 0.071 1.073 1.045 1.102
        Optimism −0.053 0.949 0.924 0.974
        Physical Conditioning −0.219 0.804 0.783 0.825
        Self-Control −0.037 0.964 0.938 0.990
        Selflessness 0.118 1.126 1.085 1.167
        Sociability 0.059 1.061 1.032 1.090
        Time x AFQT 0.004 1.004 1.002 1.006
        Time x Dominance −0.004 0.996 0.994 0.999
        Time x Even-tempered 0.003 1.003 1.001 1.006
        Time x Selflessness −0.002 0.998 0.995 1.000

n = 72,009. −2LL = − 2 log likelihood. β = standardized parameter. HR = Hazard ratio. 95% LL = 95% confidence interval lower limit of the hazard ratio. 95% UL = 95% confidence interval upper limit of the hazard ratio. The Step 1 model includes the AFQT only. The Step 2 model adds the TAPAS scale main effects to the Step 1 model. The Step 3 model adds the interaction terms (i.e., time-varying effects) to the Step 2 model. All models are significant, p < .05. The Step 2 and 3 models resulted in significant change in model fit compared to the previous steps based on a Likelihood Ratio χ2 test, p< .05. Bolded values indicate significant predictor effects, p < .05.