Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2014 Mar 25.
Published in final edited form as: Health Educ Behav. 2013 Oct;40(1 0):87S–97S. doi: 10.1177/1090198113493090

Table 2. Contagion.

Pct Activated No Intervention Community-wide Spatially focused
1 14.044 (2.130) 15.687 (3.634) 15.762 (4.817)
2 14.044 (2.130) 15.123 (2.700) 18.186 (5.648)*
3 14.044 (2.130) 15.104 (2.245) 20.597 (5.477)*
4 14.044 (2.130) 15.308 (2.059) 20.754 (5.775)*
5 14.044 (2.130) 15.140 (2.065) 22.657 (6.756)*
6 14.044 (2.130) 15.095 (1.721) 22.639 (5.829)*
7 14.044 (2.130) 15.833 (2.020) 22.039 (6.393)*
8 14.044 (2.130) 15.693 (2.050) 24.007 (5.866)*
9 14.044 (2.130) 16.035 (2.008) 23.073 (5.349)*
10 14.044 (2.130) 16.031 (1.930) 22.375 (5.199)*

Measured by the fraction of offenders who move from one block to another block between the time of intervention and the end of the simulation. Standard deviations are given in parentheses. In each row, the entries for the community-wide or spatially focused intervention are shown in bold if they represent a statistically significant (alpha = 0.05) increase in contagion compared to the control (No Intervention). An entry is marked with an asterisk if it represents a statistically significant increase in contagion compared to the alternative intervention.