Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2020 Apr 27.
Published in final edited form as: J Res Pers. 2020 Jan 15;85:103914. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2020.103914

Table 2.

Descriptive Statistics of Study Variables across Samples

Sample 1 Sample 2

Variable M SD Range Variable M SD Range
MSSD 21.46 22.56 0–136 MSSD 10.27 8.63 .17–.43.31
MIS 7.48 2.54 4.00–14.50 MISa 4.03 2.21 .25–11.50
NU 2.36 .50 1.00–3.33 NU 2.33 .59 1.17–3.83
PU 2.00 .59 1.00–3.43 PU 1.84 .59 1.00–4.00
SS 3.15 .53 1.67–4.00 SS 3.08 .57 1.42–4.00
LPer 1.83 .44 1.00–3.10 Per 3.11 .54 1.70–4.00
LPlan 1.93 .47 1.09–3.18 Plan 3.17 .45 1.27–4.00
bGS 31.04 18.50 .00–80.00
fGS 24.55 18.58 .00–70.00
bIMT .35 .15 .06–.68
fIMT .33 .16 .03–.74
bTCIP 16.73 12.80 .00–50.00
fTCIP 21.40 18.73 .00–50.00

Note. M = mean; SD = standard deviation; MSSD = mean squared successive difference of MIS scores; MIS = aggregate MIS scores (averaged across 10 days of assessment); NU = UPPS-P negative urgency; PU = UPPS-P positive urgency; SS = UPPS-P sensation seeking; LPer = UPPS-P lack of perseverance; Per = UPPS-P perseverance; LPlan = UPPS-P lack of planning; Plan = UPPS-P planning; bGS = baseline GoStop percentage of response inhibition failures; fGS = follow-up GoStop percentage of response inhibition failures; bIMT = baseline IMT ratio; fIMT = follow-up IMT ratio; bTCIP = baseline number of immediate choices; fTCIP = follow-up number of immediate choices; Sample 1 baseline n = 75–77; Sample 1 follow-up n = 63–66. Sample 2 baseline n = 126–147.

a

MIS scores from Sample 2 (i.e., using a 0–100 sliding scale) were rescaled by dividing by 20 to facilitate direct comparisons between samples.