Table 3.
Multiple hierarchical linear regressions investigating construct validity of the ad-libitum taste test
| Cumulative model | Individual predictors | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| R 2 change | F change | Β (SE) | 95 % CI | |
| Step 1 | 0.17 | 19.50* | ||
| Age | 0.46 (0.37) | −0.27–1.20 | ||
| Gender | 13.54 (2.48)* | 8.66–18.42 | ||
| Cond1 | 8.36 (2.62)* | 3.24–13.48 | ||
| Cond2 | 2.37 (3.04) | −3.61–8.36 | ||
| Step 2 | 0.07 | 5.42* | ||
| AUDIT | −0.46 (0.24) | −0.93–0.22 | ||
| Alcohol cons | 0.17 (0.08)** | 0.09–0.33 | ||
| Craving | 4.54 (1.24)* | 2.12–6.97 | ||
| Pleasantness ratings | 1.02 (0.49)** | 0.49–1.99 | ||
| Time of day | 0.01 (0.01) | −0.02–0.03 | ||
| Awareness | 0.18 (2.51) | −4.76–5.11 | ||
Dependent variable: percentage of alcohol consumed of total alcohol available
Cond1: dummy coded (‘condition expected to increase alcohol consumption’ vs. control); Cond2: dummy coded (‘condition expected to reduce alcohol consumption’ vs. control)
*p < 0.01; **p < 0.05