Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2025 Mar 1.
Published in final edited form as: Soc Sci Med. 2024 Jan 23;344:116604. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2024.116604

Table 2.

Moderation of event-level effects of enacted stigma

Model Model Path b 95% CI p
Enacted Stigma → Negative Affect Unlagged Enacted Stigma → Negative Affect
 Average Slope .16 .10, .22 < .001
 Chronic Enacted Stigma → Slope .10 .04, .16 < .001
Lag 1 Enacted Stigma → Negative Affect
 Average Slope .05 −.02, .12 .15
 Chronic Enacted Stigma → Slope .09 .02, .16 .01
Lag 2 Enacted Stigma → Negative Affect
 Average Slope −.01 −.09, .06 .77
 Chronic Enacted Stigma → Slope .05 −.02, .11 .16
Enacted Stigma → Perceived Coping Efficacy Unlagged Enacted Stigma → Perceived Coping Efficacy
 Average Slope −.16 −.24, −.08, < .001
 Chronic Enacted Stigma → Slope −.14 −.21, −.07 < .001
Lag 1 Enacted Stigma → Perceived Coping Efficacy
 Average Slope .02 −.08, .13 .72
 Chronic Enacted Stigma → Slope −.08 −.17, .02 .10
Lag 2 Enacted Stigma → Perceived Coping Efficacy
 Average Slope .09 −.02, .21 .10
 Chronic Enacted Stigma → Slope −.18 −.28, −.08 < .001

Within-person covariates included in all models: day of assessment; assessment type (weekend/weekday; morning/evening). First-order autocorrelations for the outcome were included in lagged models. Between-person covariates included: age, sexual identity, gender identity, and race/ethnicity.