Table 2.

Parameter Estimates for Model of Five Risk Exposure Latent Classes and Effect of Latent Class Membership on Binge Drinking Based on the Empirical Study

		Low Risk	Peer Risk	Econ Risk	H&P Risk	Multi-Risk
Latent Class Membership Probabilities		.41	.22	.19	.13	.04
Indicator	Overall Proportion	Item-Response Probabilities
HH Below Poverty	.37	.24	.00	.68	1.0	.47
HH Single-Parent	.29	.15	.14	.49	.58	.52
Peer Cigarette Use	.38	.00	.88	.15	.89	1.0
Peer Alcohol Use	.42	.16	.77	.21	.77	1.0
NH Unemployment	.23	.06	.06	.68	.19	1.0
NH Below Poverty	.24	.01	.03	.81	.22	.97
Effect of Latent Class Membership on Binge Drinking
Non-Inclusive LCA
Maximum-Probability Assignment		.16	.39	.18	.38	.44
Multiple Pseudo-Class Draws		.16	.37	.17	.39	.41
Inclusive LCA
Maximum-Probability Assignment		.11	.42	.12	.60	.36
Multiple Pseudo-Class Draws		.11	.41	.12	.62	.36

Notes. Econ = Economic; H&P = Household & Peer; HH = Household; NH = Neighborhood; Non-Inclusive = Outcome not included in LCA to generate posterior probabilities; Inclusive = Outcome included in LCA to generate posterior probabilities; Maximum-Probability Assignment = Assignment to latent classes based on maximum posterior probability; Multiple Pseudo-Class Draws = 20 assignments to latent classes based on each individual’s distribution of posterior probabilities. Table entries for the item-response probabilities represent probabilities of endorsing the indicators of risk exposure conditional on latent class membership. Table entries for the effects of latent class membership on binge drinking represent the proportions of past-year binge drinking conditional on latent class membership. The overall proportion of participants reporting binge drinking was .25.