Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2025 Aug 5.
Published in final edited form as: J Res Crime Delinq. 2023 Apr 20;61(5):689–726. doi: 10.1177/00224278231167841

Table 4.

Meta-analysis results for SAOMs that consider changes in delinquency-related peer processes over time for multi- and single-feeder transition districts

Model 1:
Alter
(Popularity)		 Model 2:
Ego
(Sociability)		 Model 3:
Similarity
(Selection)
Network process (baseline) 0.050
(0.006)		 *** 0.011
(0.005)		 * 0.635
(0.082)		 ***
 Network process (baseline) × multi-feeder 0.008
(0.015)		 0.034
(0.013)		 ** 0.013
(0.236)
 Network process (baseline) × single-feeder 0.010
(0.013)		 0.003
(0.011)		 −0.026
(0.167)
Network process (7th) 0.010
(0.012)		 0.028
(0.009)		 ** −0.053
(0.111)
 Network process (7th) × multi-feeder −0.108
(0.040)		 ** −0.102
(0.024)		 *** 1.123
(0.403)		 **
 Network process (7th) × single-feeder 0.001
(0.026)		 −0.025
(0.018)		 −0.072
(0.255)
Network process (8th) −0.005
(0.013)		 0.031
(0.009)		 ** −0.173
(0.145)
 Network process (8th) × multi-feeder −0.094
(0.040)		 * −0.088
(0.024)		 *** 1.313
(0.468)		 **
 Network process (8th) × single-feeder −0.007
(0.027)		 −0.025
(0.018)		 0.120
(0.309)
Network process (9th) −0.016
(0.013)		 *** 0.021
(0.011)		 0.100
(0.117)
 Network process (9th) × multi-feeder −0.076
(0.039)		 * −0.098
(0.026)		 *** 1.043
(0.395)		 **
 Network process (9th) × single-feeder −0.021
(0.027)		 −0.020
(0.020)		 −0.139
(0.247)

Notes: *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001. All models include the structural and behavioral controls presented in Table 2. Model 1 includes 49 networks, Model 2 includes 51, and Model 3 includes 49.