Skip to main content
. 2015 Jun 16;44(12):2257–2274. doi: 10.1007/s10964-015-0310-4

Table 4.

Multilevel models of individual status and clique hierarchization for emotional and instrumental support

Boys’ cliques Girls’ cliques Mixed-gender cliquesa
Emotional support Instrumental support Emotional support Instrumental support Emotional support Instrumental support
Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2
b (SE) b (SE) b (SE) b (SE) b (SE) b (SE) b (SE) b (SE) b (SE) b (SE) b (SE) b (SE)
Level 1
Individual status (IS) .20*** (.05) .14 (.09) .12* (.06) .05 (.10) .22*** (.06) .18+ (.11) .18*** (.05) .18+ (.10) .35*** (.06) .33*** (.08) .23*** (.06) .20** (.08)
Level 2
Clique status .19 (.11) .19 (.11) .07 (.12) .05 (.10) .25** (.10) .25** (.10) .10 (.10) .10 (.10) .07 (13) .07 (13) .21 (.14) .21 (.14)
Clique size −.02** (.01) −.02** (.01) −.01+ (.01) .01 (.00) −.01 (.01) −.01 (.01) .−00 (.01) .−00 (.01) −.00 (.00) −.00 (.00) .00 (.00) −.00 (.00)
Clique hierarchization (CH) .06 (.15) .06 (.15) .06 (.16) −.01 (.16) −.31* (.13) −.31* (.13) −.17 (.13) −.17 (.13) .34+ (.19) .34+ (.19) −.27 (.21) −.27 (.21)
Cross-level interaction
IS × CH .81 (.85) .81 (.92) .36 (.75) .00 (.68) .27 (.64) .45 (.62)
df 4 1 4 1 4 1 4 1 4 1 4 1
χ2 Deviance differenceb 29.66*** .89 8.06+ 0.76 26.48*** .23 13.67** .00 52.10*** .18 18.94*** .52

+ p < .1; * p < .05; ** p < .01; *** p < .001

aFor mixed-gender cliques we also included gender as control variable (girl = 0/boy = 1). The effect of gender was for all models −.15*** (.02)

bThe decrease in χ2 deviance for models 1 of boys’ and girls’ cliques is compared with the deviance of the empty model, and of mixed-gender cliques compared with the deviance of the model including only gender. Model 2 is compared with model 1