Table 3.

Summary of GLM interaction models, with the body image and eating problem scale as the response and the SDQ subscales, gender and country as the predictors, for the Japanese and Finnish adolescents school study

GLM main and interaction effects degrees of freedom values, F‐values and p‐values.
			Main effects			Two–way interactions			Three–way interaction
			SDQ subscale	Gender	Country	SDQ subscale × gender	SDQ subscale × country	Gender × country	SDQ subscale × gender × country
Model #: dichotomized SDQ subscale name	Num DF	Den DF	F p	F p	F p	F p	F p	F p	F p
1: Emotional problems	1	2893	300.23	379.76	1.63	13.44	4.20	5.32	3.23
			< 0.001	< 0.001	0.20	< 0.001	0.041	0.021	0.073
2: Conduct problems	1	2897	213.05	658.38	17.84	15.02	<Not included>	11.31	<Not included>
			< 0.001	< 0.001	< 0.001	< 0.001		< 0.001
3: Hyperactivity	1	2894	138.58	616.19	9.28	23.41	<Notincluded>	9.33	<Not included>
			< 0.001	< 0.001	0.002	< 0.001		0.002
4: Peer problems	1	2893	35.54	499.15	3.00	2.67	4.19	1.01	5.68
			< 0.001	< 0.001	0.084	0.10	0.041	0.32	0.017
5: Prosocial behavior	1	2893	0.08	333.85	0.05	1.59	15.88	0.01	5.59
			0.77	< 0.001	0.81	0.21	< 0.001	0.93	0.012

Num DF: numerator degrees of freedom of the F‐test; Den DF = denominator degrees of freedom of the F‐test. Models are selected using the likelihood ratio tests and the most reduced model without significant loss of determination is shown. P values indicating statistically significance (p < 0.05) are shown in a bold type face.