Table 5.

Results of Study 3 multivariate analysis of covariance using manipulated threat associated with Black men to predict support for policing policy reform items.

	Black men threat prime			IMS			Prime X IMS			Adjusted R2
	F	p	${\eta }_p^2$	F	p	${\eta }_p^2$	F	p	${\eta }_p^2$
Scrutiny (a)										0.023
(b)	2.04	0.156	0.02							0.008
(c)				9.30	0.003	0.07*				0.067
(d)							1.79	0.183	0.01	0.073
(e)							1.01	0.317	0.01	0.122
Cameras (a)										0.078
(b)	0.93	0.338	0.01							−0.001
(c)				2.13	0.147	0.02				0.008
(d)							3.55	0.062	0.03	0.028
(e)							8.42	0.004	0.07*	0.128
Demo matching (a)										0.010
(b)	5.00	0.027	0.04*							0.031
(c)				4.89	0.029	0.04*				0.060
(d)							8.73	0.004	0.07*	0.114
(e)							5.96	0.016	0.05*	0.111
Lethal Force (a)										0.045
(b)	0.02	0.887	0.00							−0.008
(c)				1.35	0.248	0.01				−0.005
(d)							1.73	0.191	0.01	0.001
(e)							0.46	0.501	0.00	0.039

Model 1 (a) includes only the demographic covariates (age, race, ethnicity, and gender), model 2 (b) contains only the threat manipulation, model 3 (c) includes the threat manipulation and the main effect of IMS, model 4 (d) includes the threat manipulation, the main effect of IMS, and their interaction, and Model 5 (e) includes all the predictors from model 4, controlling for demographic covariates. Statistically significant (p < 0.05) effects are indicated by an asterisk.