Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2019 Oct 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Marriage Fam. 2018 Jun 19;80(5):1314–1332. doi: 10.1111/jomf.12503

Table 2.

Coefficients from OLS Models Predicting Average Frequency of Contact with Child Network Alters at Wave 1 (N = 1,456).a

Predictor Model 1 Model 2 Model 3
Race
(ref = White)
 African American .575***
(.093)
.328***
(.082)
 Other race .375*
(.164)
.217
(.126)
Education
(ref = More than high school)
 Less than high school .445***
(.096)
.283**
(.086)
 High school or equivalent .176*
(.078)
.172**
(.055)
Hispanic .236*
(.109)
Age (divided by 10) −.030
(.046)
Female .461***
(.063)
Marital Status W1
(ref = Married)
 Separated/divorced −.232
(.124)
 Widowed −.067
(.079)
 Never married .275
(.234)
Currently working .023
(.082)
Network size W1 −.026
(.026)
Number of child network alters W1 −.093*
(.035)
Proportion of kin in network W1 .185
(.181)
Lives with a child network alter W1 .749***
(.061)
Average emotional closeness with child network alters W1 .549***
(.056)
Constant 6.695***
(.049)
6.634***
(.063)
4.823***
(.493)
R2 .029 .025 .273
F(df) 19.17*** (2, 49) 11.76*** (2, 49) 40.91*** (24, 27)
*

p<.05;

**

p<.01;

***

p<.001 (two-sided tests). Standard errors in parentheses.

a

Estimates are weighted using NSHAP Wave 1 respondent level weights (adjusted for attrition and selection at Wave 2). All models are survey-adjusted and include controls for Wave 1 self-rated physical and mental health, which are not significant and not shown due to space constraints. Applies only to respondents with at least one child network alter at Wave 1.