. 2019 Jan 29;10:61. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00061

Table 6.

Effect of identity priming and goal commitment for Low frequency (A) and High frequency (B) groups in Study 2.

	(1) Identity		(2) Average donation		(3) Extensive margin		(4) Intensive margin
	B	SE(B)	B	SE(B)	B	SE(B)	B	SE(B)
(A) Low frequency
IP	0.129	0.107	–0.039	0.047	–0.196	0.309	–0.022	0.051
IP-GC			–0.091*	0.047	–0.230	0.308	–0.074	0.148
Univ	0.827***	0.081	0.189***	0.0029	0.940***	0.202	0.146***	0.034
Const	1.745***	0.334	–0.352***	0.118	–2.813***	0.805	–0.038	0.147
Obs	312		312		312		211
R²	0.252		0.139				0.101
Adj R²	0.247		0.131				0.088
Log Likelihood					–183.673
Akaike Inf. Crit.					375.347
F	51.205^∗∗∗		16.576^∗∗∗				7.785^∗∗∗
Panel (B): High frequency
IP	0.550***	0.103	0.019	0.049	0.246	0.346	0.000	0.049
IP-GC			0.029	0.049	0.100	0.329	0.027	0.049
Univ	0.895***	0.075	0.166***	0.029	1.062***	0.205	0.086**	0.034
Const	1.474***	0.311	–0.260**	0.122	–3.287***	0.815	0.213	0.146
Obs	320		320		320		237
R²	0.375		0.096				0.029
Adj R²	0.371		0.088				0.016
Log Likelihood					–166.939
Akaike Inf. Crit.					341.878
F	95.06^∗∗∗		11.238^∗∗∗				2.284^∗

Linear regression (Columns 1, 2, and 4). Logit regression (Column 3). IP denotes the identity priming treatment, GC denotes the goal commitment treatment, Univ denotes universalistic values. Standard errors reported in the SE(B) columns. ^∗ significant at 10%; ^∗∗ significant at 5%; ^∗∗∗ significant at 1%.