Table 4.
Logistic portion of model | Count portion of model | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Exp (b) | Z | 95% CI | Exp (b) | Z | 95% CI | |
DV = Consumption | ||||||
Sex | 0.66 | −2.14* | 0.45–0.97 | 0.97 | −0.43 | 0.86–1.10 |
Previous Consumption | 0.19 | −2.85** | 0.06–0.59 | 1.06 | 11.39*** | 1.05–1.07 |
Time | 0.94 | −1.29 | 0.87–1.03 | 0.99 | −0.91 | 0.97–1.01 |
Explicit Approach | 0.64 | −6.43*** | 0.56–0.74 | 1.11 | 6.85*** | 1.08–1.15 |
Approach IAT | 0.76 | −0.98 | 0.45–1.31 | 1.07 | 0.92 | 0.92–1.24 |
DV = RAPI | ||||||
Sex | 0.67 | −1.99* | 0.45–0.99 | 0.99 | −0.16 | 0.83–1.17 |
Previous RAPI | 0.37 | −8.11*** | 0.29–0.47 | 1.09 | 11.08*** | 1.07–1.10 |
Time | 0.92 | −1.73 | 0.84–1.01 | 0.97 | −1.54 | 0.94–1.01 |
Explicit Approach | 0.74 | −5.90*** | 0.66–0.81 | 1.09 | 3.74*** | 1.04–1.14 |
Approach IAT | 0.70 | −1.24 | 0.40–1.23 | 0.88 | −1.33 | 0.73–1.06 |
DV =AUDIT | ||||||
Sex | 0.76 | −1.08 | 0.47–1.24 | 0.97 | −0.81 | 0.90–1.05 |
Previous AUDIT | 0.04 | −6.44*** | 0.01–0.10 | 1.11 | 15.04*** | 1.09–1.12 |
Time | 0.94 | −1.16 | 0.84–1.05 | 1.01 | 0.98 | 0.99–1.02 |
Explicit Approach | 0.50 | −3.59*** | 0.34–0.73 | 1.08 | 7.90*** | 1.06–1.11 |
Approach IAT | 1.32 | 1.00 | 0.76–2.30 | 1.03 | 0.60 | 0.94–1.13 |
Note. N = 506. Sex was coded 0 = men, women = 1. Approach IAT = scores on the Implicit Association Test; higher scores indicate stronger alcohol approach associations. Bolded values indicate statistically significant IAT scores. Explicit approach = scores on the inclined/indulgent subscale; higher scores indicate stronger alcohol approach inclinations. Both the IAT and the explicit measure were lagged; models predict outcomes one time point later Consumption = self-reported number of drinks consumed on a typical week. RAPI = scores on the Rutgers Alcohol Problem Index. AUDIT = scores on the Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test. Exp (b) = the exponentiated coefficient.
p < .001.
p < .01.
p < .05.