. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2020 Oct 6.

Published in final edited form as: Dev Psychol. 2019 Sep 19;55(11):2440–2450. doi: 10.1037/dev0000810

Table 1.

Proportion of Reasoning for Prediction of Inclusion

		Wrongfulness of Exclusion		Autonomy		Peer Pressure		Other

Likelihood	n	M	(SD)	M	(SD)	M	(SD)	M	(SD)
Not Likely	46	.11^a	(.30)	.04^a	(.21)	.81^a	(.39)	.04	(.21)
Likely	200	.35^b	(.45)	.23^b	(.39)	.33^b	(.42)	.09	(.27)

Note. Row proportions total to 1.0. Subscripts that do not match within a column indicate proportions that differ from each other at p < .05. Dichotomous responses were separated at the midpoint (Likert-type responses 1 – 3 were recoded as “Not Likely” while Likert-type responses 4 – 6 were coded as “Likely”).