Table 5.
Partial Results of Full Path Model for Girls, Including Interaction Terms Predicting Change in Perceived Intelligence between Wave I and Wave II
| b Coefficients (SE) for Girls’ Δ Perceived Intell. |
||
|---|---|---|
| Model 1 | Model 2 | |
| Academic groups | ||
| Both academic markersab | −.19 (.23) | −.47 (.59) |
| Learning disability only | −.37 (.24) | −.57 (.50) |
| Failure only | −.20** (.08) | .08** (.02) |
| Social context factors | ||
| Friends’ academic pressc | .17*** (.05) | .07 (.04) |
| Parents’ educational attainment | .06** (.02) | .08*** (.02) |
| Academic groups x social context factors | ||
| Both markers x friends’ academic press | .21 (.39) | — |
| Disability only x friends’ academic press | −.15 (.32) | — |
| Failure only x friends’ academic press | −.35*** (.11) | — |
| Both markers x parents’ educational attainment | — | .09 (.22) |
| Disability only x parents’ educational attainment | — | .10 (.15) |
| Failure only x parents’ educational attainment | — | −.13* (.06) |
| Intercept (Δ perceived intelligence) | 3.09*** (.58) | 3.00*** (.60) |
| N | 1,603 | 1,603 |
Source: Add Health/AHAA
a
No academic markers was the reference category for the academic group dummy variables.
b
The fifth variable in the academic groups set of dummy variables, not shown, included those missing data.
c
A binary marker of imputation on friends’ academic press included as a control.
+
p < .10
*
p < .05
**
p < .01
***
p < .001 (two-tailed tests)