Table 2.

Hierarchical regression analysis for variables predicting depression across cultural groups

	R2	Predictors	B	SE	β	t	Lower bound	Upper bound
Whites (n = 944)
Step 1	0.06**	Age	0.01	0.01	0.02	0.44	−0.02	0.03
		Income	−0.59	0.11	−0.19	−5.25**	−0.82	−0.37
		Gender	−1.16	0.37	−0.11	−3.13**	−1.89	−0.43
		Education	−0.30	0.17	−0.07	−1.8	−0.62	0.03
Step 2	0.06**	Personal impact	1.31	0.18	0.24	7.25**	0.96	1.66
	0.04**	Property damage	0.73	0.12	0.20	5.92**	0.49	0.98
	0.12**	Loss of services	1.37	0.13	0.36	10.89**	1.13	1.62
African American (n = 162)
Step 1	0.24**	Age	0.14	0.03	0.34	4.30**	0.07	0.20
		Income	−0.63	0.28	−0.2	−2.21**	−1.19	−0.07
		Gender	−0.16	0.98	−0.01	−0.17	−2.10	1.77
		Education	−1.62	0.44	−0.34	−3.68**	−2.49	−0.75
Step 2	0.03*	Personal impact	0.86	0.41	0.17	2.11*	0.05	1.66
	0.13**	Property damage	1.63	0.32	0.38	5.16**	1.01	2.25
	0.03*	Loss of services	0.68	0.29	0.19	2.32*	0.10	1.25
Latino (n = 74)
Step 1	0.05	Age	0.06	0.05	0.17	1.27	−0.04	0.16
		Income	−0.39	0.49	−0.12	−0.78	−1.38	0.60
		Gender	−0.77	1.54	−0.07	−0.5	−3.85	2.31
		Education	−0.02	0.64	−0.01	−0.04	−1.31	1.26
Step 2	0.25**	Personal impact	2.91	0.65	0.56	4.50**	1.61	4.21
	0.02	Property damage	0.56	0.46	0.16	1.21	−0.37	1.49
	0.11*	Loss of services	1.13	0.43	0.33	11.24*	0.27	2.00

Statistics from step 2 are reported from models that include only a single variable for disaster variable to reduce the suppression effects caused by the inclusion of multiple disaster variables. Selection of disaster variables was chosen based on significant interactions

^*p<0.05

^**p<0.01

^***p<0.0001