Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2018 Oct 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Adolesc. 2017 Sep 1;60:119–129. doi: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2017.08.002

Table 3.

Estimates (γ) and Standard Errors (SE) from Multi-Level Models Predicting Mothers’ Reported Conflict with Youth, N = (762)

Variables Model 1 Model 2
γ SE γ SE
Intercept 2.12*** .05 2.14*** .05
Mother-youth conflict (T-1) −.31*** .04 −.32*** .04
Age −.07*** .01 −.08*** .01
Birth order .00 .04 −.05 .04
Gender (female = 0; male =1) .09* .04 .07* .04
Sibling gender constellation .04 .05 .03 .05
Sibship size −.03 .03 −.03 .03
Differential affection (PDA; T-1) −.05** .02 −.07** .02
Differential discipline (PDD; T-1) −.01 .01 .03* .01
Mother-youth discrepancy in differential affection (DDA; T-1) .01 .02 .08** .03
Mother-youth discrepancy in differential discipline (DDD; T-1) −.01 .02 .01 .03
Birth order X PDA −.03 .03
Birth order X PDD −.14*** .02
Birth order X DDA −.08* .04
Birth order X DDD −.02 .04
PDA X DDA .07** .02
PDD X DDD .04* .02
*

p < .05.

**

p .01.

***

p < .001.

NOTE: T-1 signifies predictor variables measured in the year prior to the dependent variable. Controls that were not significant in any model were excluded from the tables: sibling age spacing and parents’ education. Two three-way interactions, birth order X PDA X DDA, and birth order X PDD X DDD, were tested in an additional step, but were not significant, and so they are omitted from this table.