Table 4.
Factors (three specific HBM constructs and PNPIA) associated with IA
| Male students | Female students | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ORu (95 % CI) | ORa (95 % CI) | ORm (95 % CI) | ORu (95 % CI) | ORa (95 % CI) | ORm (95 % CI) | |
| Constructs of the HBM | ||||||
| Perceived Susceptibility to IA | 2.31 (2.14 ~ 2.50)** | 2.27 (2.10 ~ 2.46)** | N.A. | 3.40 (3.05 ~ 3.79)** | 3.41 (3.05 ~ 3.82)** | N.A. |
| Perceived Severity of IA | 1.07 (1.01 ~ 1.13)* | 1.14 (1.07 ~ 1.21)** | N.A. | 0.98 (0.91 ~ 1.06) | 1.01 (0.94 ~ 1.10) | N.A. |
| Perceived Barriers (reducing Internet use) | 1.26 (1.23 ~ 1.28)** | 1.26 (1.23 ~ 1.29)** | 1.15 (1.12 ~ 1.18)** | 1.36 (1.32 ~ 1.40)** | 1.36 (1.32 ~ 1.40)** | 1.20 (1.16 ~ 1.24)** |
| Perceived Social Benefits (Internet use) | 1.20 (1.17 ~ 1.22)** | 1.19 (1.17 ~ 1.22)** | 1.10 (1.07 ~ 1.12)** | 1.23 (1.20 ~ 1.26)** | 1.23 (1.20 ~ 1.26)** | 1.10 (1.07 ~ 1.13)** |
| Cue to Action (reducing Internet use) | 1.36 (1.31 ~ 1.42)** | 1.36 (1.30 ~ 1.41)** | N.A. | 1.43 (1.36 ~ 1.50)** | 1.47 (1.40 ~ 1.55)** | N.A. |
| Perceived Self-efficacy (reducing Internet use) | 0.66 (0.64 ~ 0.69)** | 0.66 (0.64 ~ 0.69)** | 0.76 (0.73 ~ 0.80)** | 0.56 (0.53 ~ 0.59)** | 0.56 (0.53 ~ 0.59)** | 0.67 (0.63 ~ 0.72)** |
| Perceived number of peers with IA (PNPIA) | ||||||
| Nil | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| Only a few | 0.95 (0.73 ~ 1.22) | 1.02 (0.78 ~ 1.33) | 0.91 (0.69 ~ 1.21) | 1.53 (1.12 ~ 2.09)** | 1.50 (1.10 ~ 2.06)** | 1.30 (0.92 ~ 1.82) |
| Quite a number | 2.78 (2.17 ~ 3.55)** | 2.85 (2.21 ~ 3.67)** | 2.07 (1.57 ~ 2.73)** | 4.44 (3.24 ~ 6.08)** | 4.35 (3.16 ~ 5.98)** | 2.44 (1.72 ~ 3.45)** |
| A large number | 3.91 (2.98 ~ 5.13)** | 3.90 (2.95 ~ 5.16)** | 2.39 (1.75 ~ 3.25)** | 9.03 (6.12 ~ 13.34)** | 9.09 (6.11 ~ 13.54)** | 3.56 (2.24 ~ 5.64)** |
ORu: Univariate odds ratios
ORa: Adjusted odds ratios; adjusted for all significant variables listed in Table 2 plus the school variable
ORm: Multivariate odds ratios obtained by entering all the variables into the same logistic regression models, controlling for the significant background variables listed in Table 2 plus the school variable
*p value < 0.05; **p value < 0.01
N.A. The variables were not used to fit the multiple logistic regression model