Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Sep 22.
Published in final edited form as: J Commun. 2012 Aug 27;62(5):851–868. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01668.x

Table 2.

Bootstrap Coefficients, Standard Errors, and Confidence Intervals for Mediation Tests

b (SE) 95% CI for Bootstrap
Perceived Message Relevance −.27 (.75) (−1.77, .96)
Perceived Message Effectiveness −.01 (.36) (−.57, .83)
Perceived Message Informativeness .06 (.40) (−.62, .87)
Perceived Message Quality .29 (.76) (−.71, 2.25)
Perceived Message Attractiveness .01 (.34) (−.59, .82)
Perceived Visual Informativeness .08 (.44) (−.44, 1.30)
Perceived Benefits .00 (.25) (−.49, .45)
Perceived Barriers .31 (.60) (−.39, 1.80)
Perceived Risk Susceptibility .00 (.37) (−.73, .79)
Mammography Self-Efficacy .01 (.28) (−.36, .75)

Notes. 1000 bootstrap samples with 95% confidence intervals. Bootstrapping reveals, for example, that perceived message relevance does not reliably mediate the relationship between tailoring and intention to screen as the 95% confidence interval for the coefficient overlaps zero.