Table 5. Logistic regression analysis for variables predicting religiosity by atheists (N = 263) and theists (N = 524) in Study 4, controlling for background variables.
Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
B | SE B | eB | [95% CI] | B | SE B | eB | [95% CI] | B | SE B | eB | [95% CI] | |
Intercept | -0.67 | 0.29 | -1.24 | 0.52 | -2.19 | 0.56 | ||||||
Gender | 0.58*** | 0.17 | 1.78 | [1.31–2.43] | 0.50** | 0.17 | 1.64 | [1.17–2.30] | 0.52** | 0.18 | 1.68 | [1.19–2.37] |
Age | 0.03*** | 0.01 | 1.03 | [1.02–1.05] | 0.04*** | 0.01 | 1.04 | [1.02–1.06] | 0.03*** | 0.01 | 1.03 | [1.02–1.05] |
Education | 0.10 | 0.18 | 1.11 | [0.81–1.51] | 0.02 | 0.16 | 1.02 | [0.74–1.40] | 0.06 | 0.17 | 1.07 | [0.77–1.48] |
AQ | -0.21 | 0.29 | 0.81 | [0.46–1.43] | -0.06 | 0.36 | 0.95 | [0.53–1.70] | ||||
EQ-SQ | 0.26* | 0.15 | 1.30 | [0.97–1.75] | 0.29 | 0.18 | 1.33 | [0.98–1.81] | ||||
Intentional | 0.00 | 0.01 | 1.00 | [0.99–1.01] | 0.00 | 0.01 | 1.00 | [0.99–1.01] | ||||
Random | 0.01* | 0.00 | 1.01 | [1.00–1.01] | 0.01* | 0.00 | 1.01 | [1.00–1.02] | ||||
Mechanistic | 0.01** | 0.00 | 1.01 | [1.00–1.02] | 0.01** | 0.00 | 1.01 | [1.00–1.02] | ||||
CREDs | 0.38*** | 0.06 | 1.46 | [1.30–1.63] |
Gender is coded 1 for Females and 0 for Males, education is coded 1 for High Educated and 0 for Low Educated. AQ = Autism Quotient, EQ = Empathizing Quotient, EQ-SQ = hyper-systemizing, intentional, random, and mechanistic are the different intentionality ratings for the geometrical figures videos, CREDs = Credibility Enhancing Displays scale. eB = exponentiated B, B = odds ratio.
*p < .05.
**p < .01.
***p < .001. R2 (Nagelkerke) = .06 for Model 1, R2 (Nagelkerke) = .07 for Model 2, R2 (Nagelkerke) = .12 for Model 3 and R2 (Nagelkerke) = .19 for Model 4.