Table 4.

Results of IGC models with level-2 predictors for adolescent Internet addiction (Waves 1-3, Linear).

		Model 3		Model 4a
		Estimate	SE	Estimate	SE
FIXED EFFECTS
Intercept	β0j
Intercept	γ00	2.459***	0.0840	2.327***	0.0826
Gendera	γ01	0.066	0.0442	0.073	0.0432
Family economic statusb	γ02	−0.032	0.0846	0.038	0.0823
Family intactnessc	γ03	−0.209**	0.0657	−0.100	0.0647
Paternal behavioral control	γ04			−0.436***	0.0482
Maternal behavioral control	γ05			−0.160**	0.0479
Linear Slope	β1j
Intercept	γ10	−0.153**	0.0458	−0.107*	0.0457
Gendera	γ11	0.023	0.0241	0.018	0.0239
Family economic statusb	γ12	−0.037	0.0459	−0.062	0.0456
Family intactnessc	γ13	0.130***	0.0358	0.093**	0.0358
Paternal behavioral control	γ14			0.173***	0.0267
Maternal behavioral control	dγ15			0.013	0.0265
RANDOM EFFECTS
Level 1 (within)
Residual	rij	2.3286***	0.0643	2.3285***	0.0643
Level 2 (between)
Intercept	u0j	3.1820***	0.1513	2.9181***	0.1445
Time	u1j	0.3553***	0.0529	0.3245***	0.0522
FIT STATISTICS
Deviance		33645.70		33502.77
AIC		33669.70		33534.77
BIC		33753.34		33646.29
df		12		16

Model 3, conditional growth curve model (only with socio-demographic variables); Model 4a, conditional growth curve model (adding parental behavioral control). AIC, Akaike Information Criterion; BIC, Bayesian Information Criterion.

^aFemale = −1, Male = 1.

^bHaving economic disadvantage = −1, Not having economic disadvantage = 1.

^cNon-intact = −1, Intact = 1.

^*p < 0.05.

^**p < 0.01.

^***p < 0.001.