Table 1.
Factors affecting attribution of harmful intent.
| Parameter | Estimate | Unconditional SE | Confidence Interval | Relative Importance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intercept 1|2 | 0.73 | 0.05 | (0.63, 0.82) | |
| Intercept 2|3 | 1.60 | 0.06 | (1.49, 1.71) | |
| Intercept 3|4 | 2.14 | 0.07 | (2.01, 2.27) | |
| Intercept 4|5 | 2.82 | 0.09 | (2.66, 2.99) | |
| Age | 0.22 | 0.09 | (0.05, 0.40) | 1.00 |
| Fairness (fair) | 0.56 | 0.09 | (0.39, 0.74) | 1.00 |
| Frame (give) | 0.77 | 0.09 | (0.59, 0.95) | 1.00 |
| Gender (female) | −0.33 | 0.09 | (−0.50, −0.16) | 1.00 |
| Paranoia | 0.83 | 0.09 | (0.66, 1.00) | 1.00 |
| Frame:Paranoia | −0.52 | 0.16 | (−0.84, −0.20) | 1.00 |
| Fairness:Frame | −0.27 | 0.21 | (−0.68, 0.13) | 0.81 |
| Role (observer) | −0.03 | 0.08 | (−0.11, 0.18) | 0.66 |
| Paranoia:Role | 0.18 | 0.20 | (−0.21, 0.58) | 0.57 |
| Fairness:Paranoia | −0.03 | 0.10 | (−0.23, 0.16) | 0.22 |
| Fairness:Role | 0.02 | 0.09 | (−0.15, 0.19) | 0.13 |
Model averaged estimates, unconditional standard errors, confidence intervals and relative importance for the terms included in the top model set (Table S1). The response term for the model was a five-level, ordered categorical variable, indicating the extent to which participants attributed harmful intent to dictators. For categorical variables, reference levels are shown in parentheses. Input variables were scaled so estimates can be considered on the same scale.