Skip to main content
. 2020 Jul 27;37(1):283–298. doi: 10.1007/s10899-020-09967-w

Table 4.

Results of hierarchical linear regression analysis on adolescent problem gambling (SOGS-RA)

Predictors B SE β t p value
Model 1 (R2adj = 0.03; p < 0.001)
Gender − .150 .041 − .182 − 3.645 .000
Model 2 (R2adj = 0.27; p < 0.001)
Gender − .048 .037 − .059 − 1.229 .188
GRCS-IB .043 .004 .504 11.363 .000
Model 3 (R2adj = 0.31; p < 0.001)
Gender − .070 .036 − .085 − 1.840 .052
GRCS-IB .039 .004 .460 10.438 .000
RFQ-U .146 .031 .204 4.771 .000
Model 4 (R2adj = 0.33; p < 0.001)
Gender − .047 .036 − .057 − 1.198 .185
GRCS-IB .028 .005 .328 6.181 .000
RFQ-U .136 .030 .190 4.553 .000
GRCS-IS .027 .006 .226 4.306 .000
Model 5 (R2adj = 0.34; p < 0.001)
Gender − .041 .036 − .049 − 1.055 .255
GRCS-IB .028 .005 .329 6.229 .000
RFQ-U .102 .034 .142 3.110 .003
GRCS-IS .025 .006 .211 4.003 .000
DERS-IMPULSE .008 .003 .107 2.121 .023

B, unstandardized coefficient; β, standardized regression coefficient. Gender: 0 = Male; 1 = Female

GRCS-IS, Inability to Stop; GRCS-IB, Interpretative Bias; RFQ-U, Uncertainty; DERS-IMPULSE, Impulse Control Difficulties