. 2023 Feb 23;23(3):827–837. doi: 10.3758/s13415-023-01075-7

Table 1.

Regression model results for analysis of factors impacting WTP in the Pro/Con task in Experiment 1 of Peysakhovich and Karmarkar (2016; Column 1), and in Pro/Con Ambiguity (Columns 2 and 3)

	WTP (2016 data)	WTP	WTP
# Red	0.0764 (0.0120)***	0.0825 (0.00301)***	0.0714 (0.00356)***
# Blue	−0.002 (0.00636)	−0.0323 (0.00225)***	−0.0273 (0.0026)***
Gender	−0.248 (1.064)		−0.106 (0.235)
# Red X gender	0.0924 (0.0248)***		0.0261 (0.00596)***
# Blue X gender	−0.00713 (0.00964)		−0.0118 (0.0046)*
Constant	4.705 (0.683)***	2.595 (0.117)***	2.64 (0.156)***
R²	0.1463	0.3418	0.3532
N (Participants)	900 (100)	2756 (212)	2756 (212)

WTP
(2016 data)

WTP

# Red

0.0764

(0.0120)***

0.0825

(0.00301)***

0.0714

(0.00356)***

# Blue

−0.002

(0.00636)

−0.0323

(0.00225)***

−0.0273

(0.0026)***

Gender

−0.248

(1.064)

−0.106

(0.235)

# Red X gender

0.0924

(0.0248)***

0.0261

(0.00596)***

# Blue X gender

−0.00713

(0.00964)

−0.0118

(0.0046)*

Constant

4.705

(0.683)***

2.595

(0.117)***

2.64

(0.156)***

R²

0.1463

0.3418

0.3532

(Participants)

900

(100)

2756

(212)

2756

(212)

Standard errors are reported in parentheses, and clustered at the participant level. ***p < 0.001; *p < 0.05