Table 2.
Variable | Beta | SE | CI Lower |
CI Upper |
z | p | Effect size* | SD |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Intercept | −0.114 | 0.281 | −0.665 | 0.437 | 0.41 | 0.685 | ||
Main Effect of Attractiveness | 0.448 | 0.079 | 0.293 | 0.603 | 5.64 | < .001 | 3.79 | 4.14 |
Main Effect of Subject Age | 0.195 | 0.503 | −0.791 | 1.181 | 0.39 | 0.699 | 0.20 | 0.50 |
Main effect of Functional Limitations | −0.003 | 0.019 | −0.040 | 0.034 | 0.16 | 0.876 | −0.02 | 3.75 |
Education | 0.082 | 0.055 | −0.026 | 0.190 | 1.48 | 0.139 | 0.27 | 1.59 |
Attractiveness x Subject Age | −0.484 | 0.116 | −0.712 | −0.256 | 4.17 | < .001 | −6.61 | 6.69 |
Attractiveness x Functional Limitations | −0.012 | 0.007 | −0.026 | 0.002 | 1.94 | 0.052 | −1.35 | 55.19 |
Subject Age x Functional Limitations | −0.005 | 0.033 | −0.070 | 0.060 | 0.17 | 0.868 | −0.10 | 10.24 |
Three-way Interaction | 0.035 | 0.009 | 0.017 | 0.052 | 3.84 | < .001 | 6.75 | 95.88 |
Note. Total df = 1855; election df = 53; subject df = 35;
Effect sizes are calculated as standardized regression coefficients using the method described in Snijders and Bosker (1999), applying standardized regression coefficients to multilevel models.