Table 7.

Moderating effect of respect on the relationship between coordination and comprehensiveness.

Variable	Model 1	Model 2	Model 3
Gender
Male (reference group)
Female	−0.082*	−0.034	−0.03
Age (years)
Youth (<45) (reference group)
Middle-aged (<60)	−0.007	−0.014	−0.009
Elderly (≥60)	0.064	0.068	0.078
Marital status
Unmarried (reference group)
Married	−0.141**	−0.082*	−0.088*
Divorced	0.02	−0.007	−0.006
Others	0.007	0.007	0.006
Educational background
Uneducated (reference group)
Primary school	−0.006	0.01	0.008
Middle school	−0.013	0.025	0.029
High school	−0.023	−0.005	−0.007
Junior college	−0.059	−0.012	−0.012
College and above
Occupation
Leader (reference group)
Professionals	0.084*	0.078*	0.071*
Office clerk	0.044	−0.001	−0.009
Business service staff	0.027	0.009	0.008
Agriculture, forestry, animal husbandry and fishery personnel	0.027	0.033	0.029
Others	0.141***	0.084**	0.081**
Income
Low (reference group)
Middle	0.003	0.038	0.041
High	−0.03	0.008	0.014
Region
Developed area (reference group)
Developing	0.132***	0.052	0.055
Respect		0.473***	0.474***
Coordination		0.217***	0.233***
Respect × Coordination			0.068***
R 2	0.091	0.409	0.414
Adjusted R2	0.069	0.393	0.397
ΔR2	0.091	0.318	0.005
Variance ratio	4.145	25.719	25.001
ΔF	4.145	199.983	6.693
VIFmax	1.719	1.732	1.739

^*p < 0.05, ^**p < 0.01, ^***p < 0.001; VIF_max, maximum variance expansion factor.