Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2016 Jun 30.
Published in final edited form as: Prev Sci. 2016 Feb;17(2):208–217. doi: 10.1007/s11121-015-0603-6

Table 4.

Significance tests and effect sizes of pairwise comparisons between latent classes

Family and economic Acculturation gap Community and gang Family and drug
Class 1 versus class 2 .35 .35 .43 .05
Class 1 versus class 3 .24 .11 .34 .38
Class 1 versus class 4 .26 .01 .37 .18
Class 1 versus class 5 .24 −.02 .34 −.32
Class 1 versus class 6 .47* .45* .71* .61*
Class 2 versus class 3 −.11 −.23 −.08 .33
Class 2 versus class 4 −.09 −.34 −.05 .13
Class 2 versus class 5 −.11 −.38 −.09 .37
Class 2 versus class 6 .12 .10 .28 .56*
Class 3 versus class 4 .01 −.10 .03 .20
Class 3 versus class 5 −.00 −.14 −.00 −.71
Class 3 versus class 6 .23 .33 .37 .22
Class 4 versus class 5 −.01 −.03 −.04 −.50*
Class 4 versus class 6 .22 .44* .33* .43*
Class 5 versus class 6 .24 .48* .37 .93*

Class 1 = high polysubstance, class 2 = illicit drug, class 3 = predominately marijuana, class 4 = alcohol, class 5 = low polysubstance, class 6 = no substance

*

Significant after controlling for false discovery rate at p<.05