Table 4.

Results of the gender difference analysis with Mantel–Haenszel methods

TEC Scores	MH statistic	p-value	Effect size statistic
Components	${\chi }_{\mathrm{M}H}^2$	p-value	${\widehat{\alpha }}_{\mathrm{M}H}$
Recognition	2.640	.104	2.265
External cause	0.799	.371	1.325
Desire	0.151	.698	0.904
Belief	6.406	.011	1.750
Memory	0.000	.991	0.997
Regulation	2.525	.112	1.459
Hiding	0.493	.483	1.188
Mixed	0.674	.412	1.221
Morality	3.670	.055	1.749
Subscales (scored pass or fail)	${\chi }_{\mathrm{M}H}^2$	p-value	${\widehat{\alpha }}_{\mathrm{M}H}$
External	0.304	.581	1.158
Mental	6.487	.011	2.238
Reflective	3.142	.076	2.067
Subscales (scored 0–3)	Mantel Test	P-value	${\widehat{\psi }}_{\mathrm{L}A}$
External	0.682	.409	1.220
Mental	6.417	.011	1.686
Reflective	3.158	.076	1.438
Total TEC scores	7.207	.007	1.691

MH statistic: MH statistics used to test the null hypothesis of independence between TEC scores and gender, controlling by age. ${\chi }_{\mathrm{M}H}^2$ and the Mantel test. In our case, both statistics follow a chi-squared distribution with one degree of freedom

Effect size statistic: MH statistics to estimate the effect magnitude ${\widehat{\alpha }}_{\mathrm{M}H}$: MH common odds ratio estimator. ${\widehat{\psi }}_{\mathrm{L}A}$: Li-Agresti estimator of the cumulative common odds ratio. In both estimators values >1 indicate advantage of the reference group (girls) and values <1 indicate advantage of the focal group (boys)