Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2022 Sep 1.
Published in final edited form as: Physiol Behav. 2021 May 29;238:113479. doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2021.113479

Table 7 -.

Statistics from analyses of covariance1

Condition Food R2 Parameter MS Est ± SEM t p
1 Rest Potato chips 0.04 Intercept 315.96 21.80 ± 3.40 6.41 <0.0001
2 Interaction 274.27 0.03 ± 0.03 1.07 0.29
3 M&Ms 0.03 Intercept 249.08 16.30 ± 3.32 4.90 <0.0001
4 Interaction 261.89 −0.03 ± 0.03 −0.98 0.34
5 Oreos 0.01 Intercept 198.05 29.44 ± 6.17 4.77 <0.0001
6 Interaction 900.84 0.03 ± 0.06 0.47 0.64
7 Stress Potato chips 0.01 Intercept 98.86 21.74 ± 4.12 5.27 <0.0001
8 Interaction 286.34 −0.02 ± 0.03 −0.59 0.56
9 M&Ms 0.06 Intercept 586.27 15.70 ± 4.36 3.60 0.001
10 Interaction 319.52 0.05 ± 0.04 1.35 0.19
11 Oreos 0.01 Intercept 16.36 27.85 ± 6.42 4.34 0.0002
12 Interaction 693.20 −0.01 ± 0.05 −0.15 0.88
1

Analyses of covariance performed for all snack foods separately. Dependent variable was intake and independent variable was the interaction between negative affect and perceived life stress score (see Table 1 for descriptive stats for negative affect and perceived life stress score). P-values for slopes were held to Bonferroni correction (k = 6, P ≤ 0.008). N = 29. MS, mean square. Est, estimate (for intercept or slope of negative affect x perceived life stress interaction). SEM, standard error of the estimate.