Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2012 Oct 22.
Published in final edited form as: J Adolesc. 2011 Dec 6;35(4):787–798. doi: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2011.11.004

Table 4.

Standardized bootstrap estimates and 95% bias-corrected confidence intervals for indirect effects.

Effect Standardized indirect effect
BC 95% CI
β CIlower CIupper
Mediated effects between self-system processes and dropping out of high school
Indirect effects from PC to DO
 Total indirect −.06* 3.08 −.04
 Specific indirect
  PC, BE, DO −.01 −.02 .01
  PC, AE, DO −.05* −.07 −.03
Indirect effects from IS to DO
 Total indirect −.08* −.11 −.06
 Specific indirect
  IS, BE, DO −.07* −.10 −.05
  IS, AE, DO −.01* −.02 .00
Mediated effects between social context and school engagement
Indirect effects from TS to AE
 Total indirect .07* .05 .09
 Specific indirect
  TS, PC, AE .05* .04 .06
  TS, IS, AE .02* .001 .04
Indirect effects from PS to AE
 Total indirect .07* .06 .09
 Specific indirect
  PS, PC, AE .06* .05 .08
  PS, IS, AE .01* .001 .02
Indirect effects from TS to BE
 Total indirect .13* .11 .15
 Specific indirect
  TS, PC, BE .01 −.01 .02
  TS, IS, BE .12* .10 .14
Indirect effect from PS to BE
 Total indirect .06* .04 .08
 Specific indirect
  PS, PC, BE .01 −.01 .02
  PS, IS, BE .05* .04 .07

Note. N = 14,781. BC 95% CI = bias-corrected 95% confidence intervals (if does not contain zero, the mediated effect is significant);

*

p < 05;

PC = perceived control; DO = dropping out from high school; BE = behavioral engagement; AE = academic engagement; IS = identification with school; PS = parent support; TS = teacher support.