Appendix B.
Coefficients from MultipleSerial Mediation Models Predicting H1N1 Vaccination Decision
| Est. | [95% HDI] | (SD) | P-Value | (Pseudo)R2 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Supplementary Serial Mediation Model 1: Network Discussants | |||||
| education → vaccination | .20 | [−.25, .77] | (.25) | .11 | .18 [.07, .28] |
| proportion of network college-educated (M1) → vaccination | .81 | [.04, 1.52] | (.40) | .01 * | |
| proportion of network H1N1 discussant (M2) → vaccination | .78 | [.28, 1.31] | (.27) | .00 * | |
| education → proportion of network H1N1 discussant (M2) | −.01 | [−.14, .14] | (.07) | .41 | .06 [.02, .14] |
| prop. college-educated (M1)→ proportion of network H1N1 discussant (M2) | .05 | [−.13, .25] | (.09) | .29 | |
| education → proportion of network college-educated (M1) | .29 | [.22, .36] | (.04) | .00 * | .27 [18, .35] |
| education → proportion of network college-educated (M1) → vaccination (indirect) | .22 | [.01, .46] | (.12) | .01 * | |
| education → proportion of network H1N1 discussant (M2) → vaccination (indirect) | −.01 | [−.13, .12] | (.06) | .41 | |
| education → prop. college-educated (M1) → prop. discussant (M2) → vaccination (indirect) | .01 | [−.03, .06] | (.02) | .11 | |
| Supplementary Serial Mediation Model 2: Network Influence | |||||
| education → vaccination | .22 | [−.20, .82] | (.26) | .11 | .44 [32, .53] |
| proportion of network college-educated (M1) → vaccination | .86 | [.00, 1.70] | (.43) | .02 * | |
| proportion of network vaccine supporting (M2) → vaccination | 1.82 | [1.41, 2.38] | (.23) | .00 * | |
| education → proportion of network vaccine supporting (M2) | −.01 | [−.17, .17] | (.09) | .44 | .04 [01, .10] |
| prop. college-educated (M1)→ proportion of network vaccine supporting (M2) | −.08 | [−.13, .33] | (.11) | .21 | |
| education → proportion of network college-educated (M1) | .29 | [.21, .36] | (.04) | .00 * | .27 [18, .35] |
| education → proportion of network college-educated (M1) → vaccination (indirect) | .23 | [.00, .48] | (.13) | .02 * | |
| education → proportion of network vaccine supporting (M2) → vaccination (indirect) | −.03 | [−.30, .32] | (.16) | .44 | |
| education → prop. college-educated (M1) → prop. supporting (M2) → vaccination (indirect) | .05 | [−.08, .19] | (.06) | .21 | |
NOTES: N = (maximum) 223. Table entries are probit estimates from Bayesian structural equation models specifying default priors in Mplus 7.4. “Est.” is the effect estimate, or the median of the Bayesian posterior probability density. 95% highest posterior density interval (HDI) is in brackets. “SD” is the posterior standard deviation of the estimate. “P-Value” is the one-sided Bayesian posterior probability, given the data and default priors, that the true effect is equal to zero or in the opposite direction than that observed.
Asterisk indicates 95% credible interval does not contain zero.
Rows with one arrow represent direct effect estimates; rows with multiple arrows represent indirect effect estimates. Paths from control variables (number of weeks pregnant, race/ethnicity, advanced maternal age, and network size) to endogenous variables and covariance among exogenous covariates are also estimated but not presented here. Each Bayes model matched the data well, with a posterior predictive p-value equal to .833 for both models (PPP > .05 indicates good fit).