Skip to main content

View full-text article in PMC

. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2018 Nov 1.

Published in final edited form as: J Nutr Educ Behav. 2017 Sep 14;49(10):872–876.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jneb.2017.07.013

Table 2. Multiple Regression Analyses for Relationships Between Discrimination and Intake of Sweets/Week.

	Model 1			Model 2			Model 3
Outcome	Total Sweet Intake			American Sweet Intake			South Asian Sweet Intake
Variable	B	SE B	β	B	SE B	β	B	SE B	β
Age	-.002*	.001	-.098	-.004*	.001	-.131	.000	.001	.012
Female sex	-.031	.013	-.080	-.021	.017	-.042	-.042*	.012	-.122
Income ≥$75,000/year	-.007	.017	-.015	.002	.022	.004	-.016^*	.015	-.039
Education bachelors or higher	-.017	.021	-.028	-.004	.028	-.005	-.032^*	.019	-.059
Married/Living with Partner	-.014	.025	-.020	-.029	.032	-.032	.011	.022	.017
Years in US	.001	.001	.029	.001	.001	.060	-.001	.001	-.040
Study site	.060^*	.013	.154	.073^*	.017	.143	.046	.012	.133
Traditional Cultural Beliefs	.000	.001	-.008	.003	.001	.067	-.004	.001	-.159
Discrimination	.170^*	.043	.133	.188^*	.056	.112	.123^*	.038	.107
R²	.05			.06			.08
F for change inR²	F (9, 865)=5.406^**			F (9, 865)=5.718^**			F (9, 865)=8.258^*

^*

p < .05.;

^**

p < .001