Skip to main content
. 2015 Jul 31;86(5):1489–1506. doi: 10.1111/cdev.12396

Table 1.

Study 1 Descriptives for Each Year Group Network

Year 9 Midadolescence Year 12 Late adolescence Group comparison
M (SD) Range N M (SD) Range N t(df), p
Age (years) 14.46 (0.26) 13.88 to 14.79 23 17.22 (0.29) 16.91 to 17.97 19
Kiddie Mach 51.74 (7.10) 41 to 70 23 55.47 (10.4) 42 to 85 19 t(40) = 1.38, = .176
mDG: Points to self 13.88 (27.50) 0 to 100 23 28.36 (35.30) 0 to 100 19 t(34)a = 1.46, = .154
  Density
M (SEM)
Range N Density M (SEM) Range N t(df), p
mDG: Points to others 3.91 (.10) 0 to 15 506 3.98 (.21) 0 to 22.22 342 t(846) = .28, = .388
SNQ relationship strengthb 0.41 (.01) −.13 to 1 506 0.33 (.01) −.25 to 1 342 t(846) = 4.36, < .001
SNQ relationship reciprocationc 0.15 (.01) −.88 to .88 506 0.15 (.01) ‐.63 to .63 342 t(846) = 1.59, = .056
Duration of acquaintance (years)d 3.04 (.12) 1 to 15 506 2.6 (.11) .67 to 17.32 342 t(846) = 3.01, = .001

The upper half of the table shows nonnetwork descriptives while the lower half of the table shows descriptives for network data. Network data were compared across groups using t tests based on bootstrapped mean density and standard error, with degrees of freedom based on N observations across groups. mDG = modified Dictator Game; SNQ = Social Network Questionnaire.

aDegrees of freedom reduced to take into account inequality of variances. bRelationship strength values represent perceived strength of unidirectional social ties. Values close to one reflect strong relationships; negative values or values close to zero reflect negative or neutral perceived relationships, respectively. cReciprocation values represent the extent to which relationships are positively reciprocated. Positive values reflect greater in‐ than out‐link strength. dFor Year 9, maximum duration of acquaintance exceeds maximum age. Most likely, a participant rounded up to the nearest year when reporting duration of acquaintance.