TABLE 4.

Multiple group comparison tests of prosocial affordances as a mediator of textbook condition and topic interest^a

	URM (n = 65)		Asian (n = 49)		White (n = 80)
Predictor	b	SE	b	SE	b	SE
Prosocial affordances as dependent variable
Prosocial textbook	1.22***	0.29	0.29	0.32	0.47*	0.21
Baseline prosocial affordances	0.52***	0.14	0.47**	0.16	0.38***	0.10
Perceived competence	0.27	0.19	−0.06	0.17	0.53***	0.14
Topic interest as dependent variable
Prosocial affordances	0.57***	0.11	0.27*	0.13	0.30**	0.10
Prosocial textbook	0.17	0.27	0.29	0.30	−0.13	0.22
Baseline topic interest	0.20*	0.10	0.31***	0.10	0.33***	0.07
Perceived competence	0.22	0.14	0.44**	0.20	0.26*	0.12
Total indirect effects	0.69**	0.24	0.08	0.10	0.14*	0.07

^aProsocial textbook (prosocial utility textbook = 1, general utility/neutral textbook = 0). Asterisks indicate significant coefficients (*p ≤ 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001). N = 194. One participant was excluded from analyses because that student did not fall into the URM, Asian, or white categories. Total indirect effects: URM 95% CI [0.32, 1.25]; Asian 95% CI [–0.07, 0.33); white 95% CI [0.03, 0.35].