Table 2. Cross-sectional multiple regression models predicting benevolent sexism at T1.
| Benevolent Sexism–basic model | Benevolent Sexism–full model | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| B | SE | CI 2.5% | CI 97.5% | B | SE | CI 2.5% | CI 97.5% | |
| Gender a | 0.097** | 0.029 | 0.041 | 0.154 | 0.087** | 0.029 | 0.031 | 0.144 |
| Hostile Sexism b c | 0.464*** | 0.016 | 0.431 | 0.496 | 0.422*** | 0.017 | 0.389 | 0.456 |
| Number of Children b d | 0.082*** | 0.012 | 0.057 | 0.106 | 0.070*** | 0.014 | 0.042 | 0.098 |
| Hostile Sexism × Gender | -0.166*** | 0.026 | -0.217 | -0.115 | -0.153*** | 0.027 | -0.204 | -0.101 |
| Number of Children × Gender | 0.054** | 0.019 | 0.017 | 0.091 | 0.024 | 0.021 | -0.018 | 0.066 |
| Age b | -0.003 | 0.001 | -0.005 | 0.000 | ||||
| Education b e | -0.064*** | 0.006 | -0.076 | -0.051 | ||||
| Household Income b | -0.053* | 0.023 | -0.098 | -0.01 | ||||
| Age × Gender | 0.009*** | 0.002 | 0.005 | 0.014 | ||||
| Education × Gender | 0.004 | 0.01 | -0.015 | 0.023 | ||||
| H.Income × Gender | 0.022 | 0.03 | -0.041 | 0.081 | ||||
N = 6,017
*** p < .001
** p < .01
* p < .05
a Gender was contrast coded (0 = woman; 1 = man)
b These variables were centred
c Scale ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree)
d Number of children ranged between 0–13
e Education ranged from 0 (no qualification) to 10 (highest level of qualification); f Household income was log-centred.