Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2013 Feb 1.
Published in final edited form as: Psychol Serv. 2012 Feb;9(1):74–88. doi: 10.1037/a0027098

Table 3.

Correlation Matrix (Appendix)

Key Variables n Correlation Matrix
# of Visits 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
1. # of Visits 181
2. Child EBP Content 181 .18*
3. Child EBP Technique 181 .19* .61***
4. Parent EBP Content 165 .06 .25*** .25***
5. Parent EBP Technique 165 −.01 .20** .44*** .67***
6. Child Other Content 181 .15 .49*** .42*** .31*** .21**
7. Child Other Technique 181 .11 .57*** .46*** .17* .07 .50***
8. Parent Other Content 165 −.02 .05 .13 .48*** .48*** .28*** .12
9. Parent Other Technique 165 .00 .09 .17* .48*** .41*** .24** .28*** .67***
10. Parent Educ.: Some college + 176 .25*** .05 .06 −.13 −.04 −.09 .14 −.12 −.04
11. Funding source: School-based 172 .33*** .19* .11 .06 .05 .13 .14 −.03 −.13 .19*
12. Parent Alliance (TASC) 151 .28*** .19* .25** .05 .10 .11 .03 .03 .02 .04 −.07
13. Therapist Months Practiced 78 −.15* −.06 −.12** −.05 −.10 .01 −.04 −.10 −.11 .02 .08 −.23**
14. Gender: Female 181 −.13 .05 .03 .07 −.03 .07 .03 −.13 −.03 −.11 −.13 .03 .02
15. Comorbidity 181 .16* .23* .18* −.02 .05 .15* .17* −.05 .04 .09 .21** .02 .00 −.06
*

= p <.05;

**

=p ≤ .01;

***

= p ≤ .001; 2-tailed significance.

Note: All correlations are Pearson correlations, with the exception of variables associated with parent education, funding source, gender, and comorbidity (Spearman’s Rho was calculated for those correlations given the categorical nature of those two variables).