Skip to main content
. 2020 Mar 10;8(3):e16240. doi: 10.2196/16240

Table 6.

Flowers task: multilevel model of marijuana high in relation to number of correct responses.

Effects Flower number of correct responses (n=58)

Estimate SE 95% CI P value
Fixed effects




Person level (level 2)

Intercept 2.92 0.85 N/Aa .001b


Session 0 0 N/A .007b


Session2 (quadratic) N/A N/A N/A N/A


Subjective high (PMc) −0.35 0.2 N/A .08


Distraction (PM) 0.83 0.65 N/A .2


Subjective high (PM) × distraction (PM) 0.18 0.15 N/A .23


Gender (0=male, 1=female) −0.05 0.11 N/A .64


Age (0=age 20) −0.14 0.03 N/A .001b


Full-scale IQ (0=IQ score of 110) 0 0.01 N/A .66

Session level (level 1)


Subjective high (CCd) −0.03 0.01 N/A .01e


Distraction (CC) −0.13 0.03 N/A .001b


Subjective high (CC) × distraction (CC) 0.01 0.01 N/A .21
Random effects

Level 1 residual variance 0.59 0.02 0.56 to 0.63 N/A

Intercept 0.16 0.03 0.10 to 0.24 N/A

aNot applicable.

bP<.01.

cPM: person mean scores, reflecting individual differences in subjective marijuana high or distraction across all sessions.

dCC: constant-centered scores (centered at 0), reflecting session-to-session variation in scores or session-specific scores.

eP<.05.