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 3.

Marginal Effects from Logit Models Predicting whether Respondents Lost a Child Alter (for reasons other than death) between Waves 1 and 2 (N = 1,456).a

Predictor Model 1 Model 2 Model 3
Race
(ref = White)
 African American .110*
(.045)
.130**
(.048)
 Other race .163
(.086)
.084
(.088)
Education
(ref = More than high school)
 Less than high school .142**
(.044)
.170**
(.054)
 High school or equivalent .004
(.034)
.017
(.034)
Hispanic .013
(.069)
Average frequency of contact with child network alters W1 −.116***
(.019)
−.117***
(.019)
−.097***
(.019)
Age (divided by 10) −.044
(.024)
Female −.011
(.028)
Marital Status W1
(ref = Married)
 Separated/divorced .052
(.058)
 Widowed −.076
(.043)
 Never married −.241*
(.110)
Currently working .035
(.036)
Network size W1 .036
(.018)
Number of child network alters W1 .119***
(.025)
Lives with a child network alter W1 −.024
(.050)
Proportion of kin in network W1 .048
(.101)
Average emotional closeness with child network alters W1 −.097**
(.031)
F(df) 13.50*** (3, 48) 14.05*** (3, 48) 4.28*** (25, 26)
*

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.