Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2010 Mar 24.
Published in final edited form as: Addiction. 2009 Mar;104(3):420–429. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2008.02457.x

Table 2.

Comparison of the (i) full Cholesky decomposition, (ii) uni-directional Peer Group Deviance causes Cannabis Use (PGD→CU), (iii) uni-directional Cannabis Use causes Peer Group Deviance (CU→PD), and (iv) reciprocal causation (PGD↔CU) models at 15 to 17 years, 18 to 21 years and 22 to 25 years.

15–17 years −2LL df Δ−2LL Δdf p BIC
Cholesky 6921.31 3546 −3214.81
PGD→CU 6935.70 3548 14.39 2 <0.001 −3211.38
CU→PGD 6923.23 3548 1.92 2 0.38 −3217.62
PGD↔CU 6921.34 3547 0.03 1 0.86 −3216.68
18–21 years LL df Δ2LL Δdf p BIC
Cholesky 7722.99 3541 −2804.56
PGD→CU 7752.65 3543 29.66 2 <0.001 −2793.50
CU→PGD 7726.97 3543 3.98 2 0.14 −2806.33
PGD↔CU 7723.28 3542 0.29 1 0.59 −2806.30
22–25 years −2LL df Δ2LL Δdf p BIC
Cholesky 7725.38 3542 −2805.25
PGD→CU 7744.32 3544 18.94 2.00 <0.001 −2799.54
CU→PGD 7729.08 3544 3.70 2.00 0.16 −2807.16
PGD↔CU 7728.00 3543 2.62 1.00 0.11 −2805.82

−2LL = log-likelihood

Δ−2LL=change in log-likelihood which is asymptotically distributed as a chi-square

BIC = sample size adjusted Bayesian Information Criterion

All PGD and CU thresholds are adjusted for the linear effects of age at interview