Table 5.
Predictor | Biphilic/Androphilic persisters | Gynephilic desisters | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
B | SE | Wald | p | eB | B | SE | Wald | p | eB | |
Age at assessment | 0.26 | 0.16 | 2.90 | 0.09 | 1.30 | −0.14 | 0.11 | 1.55 | 0.21 | 0.87 |
IQ | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.58 | 0.45 | 1.02 | −0.03 | 0.01 | 2.77 | 0.10 | 0.97 |
Social class | −0.12 | 0.03 | 12.28 | <0.001 | 0.89 | −0.01 | 0.01 | 0.51 | 0.47 | 0.99 |
Composite z-score | 1.32 | 0.55 | 5.82 | 0.02 | 3.74 | −0.66 | 0.31 | 4.38 | 0.04 | 0.52 |
Reference group is the Biphilic/Androphilic Desisters. This group was chosen as the reference because it had the largest group size. A preliminary analysis with marital status included as a predictor variable showed that it did not have a significant effect and was, therefore, excluded in the final regression model. As suggested by Reviewer 3, per Benjamin et al. (116), for the “discovery of new effects,” p-values between 0.05 and 0.005 should be viewed as “suggestive” (i.e., informative, but cautiously interpreted), and p-values < 0.005 as “significant” (i.e., stronger evidence for the implausibility of a difference merely by chance).