Skip to main content
. 2021 Apr 6;17(2):e1152. doi: 10.1002/cl2.1152

Table 6.

Tests of differences between intervention components

  Coefficient difference F‐statistic df p Value
Hypothesis (1) (2) (3) (4)
Peer‐assisted = CAI 0.31 10.65 51.76 0.002
Peer‐assisted = Coaching personnel 0.42 8.84 43.26 0.005
Peer‐assisted = Incentives 0.31 8.49 33.26 0.006
Peer‐assisted = Medium‐group 0.21 4.40 34.30 0.043
Peer‐assisted = Progress monitoring 0.49 9.28 43.48 0.004
Peer‐assisted = Small group 0.06 0.91 45.58 0.345
Small‐group = CAI 0.26 13.51 35.75 0.001
Small‐group = Coaching personnel 0.37 9.08 48.32 0.004
Small‐group = Incentives 0.25 8.46 27.60 0.007
Small‐group = Medium‐group 0.15 3.58 25.21 0.070
Small‐group = Progress monitoring 0.43 10.45 38.39 0.003
Fractions = Algebra/Pre‐algebra 0.53 14.15 10.18 0.004
Fractions = Geometry 0.33 6.12 10.21 0.032
Fractions = Number sense 0.39 8.12 7.16 0.024
Fractions = Operations 0.47 10.09 6.29 0.018
Fractions = Problem solving 0.29 6.21 8.95 0.035

Column 1 reports the difference between the coefficients of the two components mentioned in the Hypothesis‐column. To calculate the F‐statistic, the degrees of freedom, and the (two‐sided) p value in columns 2–4, we used the test described in Tipton and Pustejovsky (2015), and implemented it using our own extension to the Wald_test function in R package clubSandwich (Pustejovsky, 2020) and the “HTZ” small‐sample correction procedure. The coefficients and variance estimates are from the model reported in Table 5, column 2.

Abbreviation: CAI, computer‐assisted instruction.