Table 4.

Summary of hierarchical regression analysis for variables predicting psychological consequences following a WPV incident among law enforcers.

Variable	Model 1			Model 2			Model 3			Model 4
	B	SE B	β	B	SE B	β	B	SE B	β	B	SE B	β
Sex	−0.88	0.61	−0.13	−0.33	0.58	−0.05	−0.21	0.58	−0.03	0.27	1.55	0.04
Age	1.04	0.27	0.33***	0.93	0.26	0.30***	0.83	0.26	0.26**	0.86	0.26	0.27**
Victim.	0.03	0.03	0.12	0.02	0.03	0.07	0.02	0.03	0.06	0.02	0.03	0.06
Witness	−0.02	0.02	−0.14	−0.02	0.02	−0.10	−0.01	0.02	−0.08	−0.02	0.02	−0.10
Inj. without	1.07	0.72	0.14	0.92	0.67	0.12	0.78	0.67	0.10	0.81	0.67	0.10
Inj. with	3.18	0.76	0.38***	3.08	0.71	0.37***	3.13	0.70	0.37***	3.30	0.73	0.39***
Coll. sup.				−0.46	0.36	−0.12	−0.47	0.36	−0.13	−0.47	0.36	−0.13
Emp. sup.				−0.95	0.35	−0.26**	−0.80	0.36	−0.22*	−0.78	0.36	−0.22*
Normalization							−0.65	0.56	−0.10	−1.30	1.19	−1.19
Taboo of complaining							0.89	0.54	0.14	2.16	1.90	0.34
Sex × normalization										0.99	1.32	0.16
Sex × taboo										−1.63	1.34	−0.26
Adjusted R2		0.23			0.38			0.41			0.42
F for change in R2		6.39***			9.00***			1.81			1.10

N = 109 for all models. ‘Victim.’ refers to ‘past victimization’; ‘inj. without’ refers to ‘injury without hospitalization’; ‘inj. with’ refers to ‘injury with hospitalization’; ‘coll. sup.’ refers to ‘colleagues support’; ‘emp. sup’ refers to ‘employer support’; ‘sex × taboo’ refers to the interaction between sex and taboo of complaining.

*P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001.