*p <.05. **p <.01. ***p <.001.

Similar documents
Power and Priorities: Gender, Caste, and Household Bargaining in India

Comparative Analysis of Fresh and Dried Fish Consumption in Ondo State, Nigeria

AJAE Appendix: Testing Household-Specific Explanations for the Inverse Productivity Relationship

Online Appendix to The Effect of Liquidity on Governance

Panel A: Treated firm matched to one control firm. t + 1 t + 2 t + 3 Total CFO Compensation 5.03% 0.84% 10.27% [0.384] [0.892] [0.

Looking Long: Demographic Change, Economic Crisis, and the Prospects for Reducing Poverty. La Conyuntura vs. the Long-run

Emerging Local Food Systems in the Caribbean and Southern USA July 6, 2014

November 9, Myde Boles, Ph.D. Program Design and Evaluation Services Multnomah County Health Department and Oregon Public Health Division

Wine-Tasting by Numbers: Using Binary Logistic Regression to Reveal the Preferences of Experts

The Families, Children and Child Care (FCCC) study in relation to area characteristics: Recruitment and sample description

Zeitschrift für Soziologie, Jg., Heft 5, 2015, Online- Anhang

Table S1. Countries and years in sample.

This is a repository copy of Poverty and Participation in Twenty-First Century Multicultural Britain.

저작권법에따른이용자의권리는위의내용에의하여영향을받지않습니다.

Labor Supply of Married Couples in the Formal and Informal Sectors in Thailand

Gail E. Potter, Timo Smieszek, and Kerstin Sailer. April 24, 2015

Broadband and Civic Engagement in Rural Areas: What Matters? Brian Whitacre Oklahoma State University

Debt and Debt Management among Older Adults

Multiple Imputation for Missing Data in KLoSA

It s about time! Gender, parenthood and household divisions of labor under different welfare regimes

segregation and educational opportunity

BORDEAUX WINE VINTAGE QUALITY AND THE WEATHER ECONOMETRIC ANALYSIS

Investigating China s Stalled Revolution : Husband and Wife Involvement in Housework in the PRC. Juhua Yang Susan E. Short

ARE THERE SKILLS PAYOFFS IN LOW AND MIDDLE-INCOME COUNTRIES?

Community differences in availability of prepared, readyto-eat foods in U.S. food stores

Credit Supply and Monetary Policy: Identifying the Bank Balance-Sheet Channel with Loan Applications. Web Appendix

Dietary Diversity in Urban and Rural China: An Endogenous Variety Approach

Table A.1: Use of funds by frequency of ROSCA meetings in 9 research sites (Note multiple answers are allowed per respondent)

Update to A Comprehensive Look at the Empirical Performance of Equity Premium Prediction

What does radical price change and choice reveal?

The Role of Calorie Content, Menu Items, and Health Beliefs on the School Lunch Perceived Health Rating

Characteristics of U.S. Veal Consumers

Religion and Innovation

Method for the imputation of the earnings variable in the Belgian LFS

ASSESSING THE HEALTHFULNESS OF FOOD PURCHASES AMONG LOW-INCOME AREA SHOPPERS IN THE NORTHEAST

DETERMINANTS OF GROWTH

Organic Premiums of U.S. Fresh Produce by Travis A. Smith, Biing-Hwan Lin, and Chung L. Huang

United Way of Northern Shenandoah Valley Community Needs Update:

Structural Reforms and Agricultural Export Performance An Empirical Analysis

STA Module 6 The Normal Distribution

STA Module 6 The Normal Distribution. Learning Objectives. Examples of Normal Curves

What are the Driving Forces for Arts and Culture Related Activities in Japan?

Sickness Absences of Self-employed Male Workers: Fewer but Longer

The R survey package used in these examples is version 3.22 and was run under R v2.7 on a PC.

Problem Set #3 Key. Forecasting

The Financing and Growth of Firms in China and India: Evidence from Capital Markets

Business Statistics /82 Spring 2011 Booth School of Business The University of Chicago Final Exam

To: Professor Roger Bohn & Hyeonsu Kang Subject: Big Data, Assignment April 13th. From: xxxx (anonymized) Date: 4/11/2016

Wen Zheng, Senarath Dharmasena, Ramkumar Janakirarman, Oral Capps, Jr.

Analysis of Things (AoT)

Citrus Attributes: Do Consumers Really Care Only About Seeds? Lisa A. House 1 and Zhifeng Gao

Senior poverty in Canada, : A decomposition analysis of income and poverty rates

Internet Appendix for CEO Personal Risk-taking and Corporate Policies TABLE IA.1 Pilot CEOs and Firm Risk (Controlling for High Performance Pay)

A Hedonic Analysis of Retail Italian Vinegars. Summary. The Model. Vinegar. Methodology. Survey. Results. Concluding remarks.

PARENTAL SCHOOL CHOICE AND ECONOMIC GROWTH IN NORTH CAROLINA

Internet Appendix for Does Stock Liquidity Enhance or Impede Firm Innovation? *

Growth in early yyears: statistical and clinical insights

The determinantsof charitable givingin Belgium

2014 High School Graduates Christian Academy of Madison

Citation for published version (APA): Goossens, N. (2014). Health-Related Quality of Life in Food Allergic Patients: Beyond Borders [S.l.]: s.n.

Coffee Price Volatility and Intra-household Labour Supply: Evidence from Vietnam

Online Appendix. for. Female Leadership and Gender Equity: Evidence from Plant Closure

Aging, Social Capital, and Health Care Utilization in the Province of Ontario, Canada

PROBIT AND ORDERED PROBIT ANALYSIS OF THE DEMAND FOR FRESH SWEET CORN

Pitfalls for the Construction of a Welfare Indicator: An Experimental Analysis of the Better Life Index

US Chicken Consumption. Presentation to Chicken Marketing Summit July 18, 2017 Asheville, NC

Eestimated coefficient. t-value

DATA AND ASSUMPTIONS (TAX CALCULATOR REVISION, MARCH 2017)

Heat stress increases long-term human migration in rural Pakistan

Perspective of the Labor Market for security guards in Israel in time of terror attacks

Handling Missing Data. Ashley Parker EDU 7312

Final Exam Financial Data Analysis (6 Credit points/imp Students) March 2, 2006

Tim Woods Lia Nogueira Shang Ho Yang Xueting Deng WERA 72 Meetings 2014

Missing Data: Part 2 Implementing Multiple Imputation in STATA and SPSS. Carol B. Thompson Johns Hopkins Biostatistics Center SON Brown Bag 4/24/13

Internet Appendix to. The Price of Street Friends: Social Networks, Informed Trading, and Shareholder Costs. Jie Cai Ralph A.

Analysis of Influencing Factors of Deviation of Consumer Willingness and Behavior in Popular Tea Consumption

BEEF Effect of processing conditions on nutrient disappearance of cold-pressed and hexane-extracted camelina and carinata meals in vitro 1

APPENDIX TABLE OF CONTENTS DOCUMENT TITLE

Risk Assessment Project II Interim Report 2 Validation of a Risk Assessment Instrument by Offense Gravity Score for All Offenders

Development of an efficient machine planting system for progeny testing Ongoing progeny testing of black walnut, black cherry, northern red oak,

THE STATISTICAL SOMMELIER

Long term impacts of facilitating temporary contracts: A comparative analysis of Italy and Spain using birth cohorts

Plate 2.1 City map of Puducherry showing selected areas for the study

November K. J. Martijn Cremers Lubomir P. Litov Simone M. Sepe

Consumer preferences for organic and welfare labelled meat A natural field experiment conducted in a high class restaurant

Gender and Firm-size: Evidence from Africa

MAIN FACTORS THAT DETERMINE CONSUMER BEHAVIOR FOR WINE IN THE REGION OF PRIZREN, KOSOVO

Religion, Housing Discrimination, and Residential Attainment in Philadelphia: Are Muslims Disadvantaged?

Volume 30, Issue 1. Gender and firm-size: Evidence from Africa

An Intersectional Analysis of the Female Postsecondary Advantage: Gender, Race and College Selectivity*

Activity 10. Coffee Break. Introduction. Equipment Required. Collecting the Data

Ex-Ante Analysis of the Demand for new value added pulse products: A

Missouri State University

A comparison between homebrew and commercial scale utilization Eric Bean and Frank Barickman

Relationships Among Wine Prices, Ratings, Advertising, and Production: Examining a Giffen Good

From VOC to IPA: This Beer s For You!

Produce Education Program 2015 Evaluation Report Comparison of Key Findings

INTERNATIONAL UNDERGRADUATE PROGRAM BINA NUSANTARA UNIVERSITY. Major Marketing Sarjana Ekonomi Thesis Odd semester year 2007

Food Policy, Economics and Obesity Prevention

Which of your fingernails comes closest to 1 cm in width? What is the length between your thumb tip and extended index finger tip? If no, why not?

Transcription:

Table 1 Weighted Descriptive Statistics and Zero-Order Correlations with Fatherhood Timing (N = 1114) Variables Mean SD Min Max Correlation Interaction time 280.70 225.47 0 1095 0.05 Interaction time with mother absent 81.67 121.11 0 880 0.10 ** Affection and talks with child 3.52 0.85 1 5 0.11 *** After-school activities 0.37 0.48 0 1 0.13 *** Cognitive activities 2.09 0.80 1 5 0.14 *** Sports and outdoor activities 2.27 1.12 1 5 0.07 * Religious services at least once/month 0.52 0.50 0 1 0.05 Rule enforcement 2.55 0.81 1 4-0.10 *** Fatherhood timing a 2.79 0.50 1.70 4.90 Female child 0.53 0.50 0 1-0.03 Child's age 10.95 3.62 6 17-0.10 *** Father's age 41.20 6.64 22 76 0.46 *** Father's education Less than HS 0.15 0.36 0 1-0.21 *** HS diploma 0.26 0.44 0 1-0.22 *** Some college 0.22 0.41 0 1 0.01 Family income (1000s) 85.92 84.16 4.12 936.69 0.21 *** Father's race/ethnicity Black 0.05 0.22 0 1-0.08 ** Hispanic 0.15 0.35 0 1-0.17 *** Other non-white 0.05 0.22 0 1 0.08 ** # children 2.38 0.97 1 6-0.15 *** Father's work hours < 35 hrs/wk 0.06 0.23 0 1 0.06 * > 45 hrs/wk 0.42 0.49 0 1 0.01 Mother's share of couple earnings 0.26 0.25 0 1 0.12 *** Mother's employment (average) Mother not working 0.18 0.39 0 1-0.05 Mother < 35 hrs/wk 0.39 0.49 0 1 0.01 Aggravation 2.09 0.82 1 5-0.04 Support for involvement 3.42 0.42 1.33 4.00 0.13 *** Father's expectations for child's ed Low educ expectations 0.27 0.44 0 1-0.18 *** High educ expectations 0.23 0.42 0 1 0.12 *** Mother's egalitarianism 2.79 0.66 1 4 0.11 *** Mother's support for involvement 3.46 0.42 1 4 0.08 ** Note: All tables are based on the Panel Study of Income Dynamics and Child Development Supplement

Table 2 Weighted Percentage Distributions of Education and Family Income among Early, On-time, and Delayed Fathers (N = 750) Fatherhood Timing Early On-time Delayed Total (under 25) (25-30) (over 30) Education Less than HS 24.05 a 13.46 5.46 b 13.86 HS diploma 37.80 a 28.43 13.75 b 26.67 Some college 25.88 23.12 20.24 23.00 College graduate 12.27 a 34.99 60.55 b 36.48 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 F (5.95, 4160.62) = 12.58 p <.001 Family income Bottom quartile 40.40 a 20.22 16.17 c 24.29 Second quartile 36.28 a 25.79 12.93 b 24.95 Third quartile 11.82 a 29.69 30.42 c 25.31 Top quartile 11.50 a 24.30 40.47 b 25.45 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 F (5.95, 4322.39) = 12.63 p <.001 a Significantly different than the on-time and delayed groups combined, p <.05 b Significantly different than the early and on-time groups combined, p <.05 c Significantly different than the early group (p <.05), but not significantly different than the early and on-time groups combined

Table 3a Tobit Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting Interaction Time with Mother Absent (N = 1114) Fatherhood timing a 37.38 ** 13.11 30.24 16.84 25.35 13.71 28.07 * 12.87 32.36 * 13.35 32.53 * 13.05 21.09 13.10 Female child -57.62 *** 13.20-56.78 *** 13.16-59.79 *** 13.16-58.71 *** 13.20-57.79 *** 13.17-55.47 *** 13.05-59.64 *** 13.01 Child's age -3.87 * 1.82-4.96 * 2.37-4.29 * 1.85-4.06 * 1.83-4.33 * 1.84-4.33 * 1.73-4.20 * 1.77 Father's age 1.07 1.58 Less than HS -56.28 * 22.07-31.85 23.48 HS diploma -2.25 17.57 1.87 16.86 Some college 16.50 18.86 21.87 18.26 Family income (1000s) 0.07 0.11 Black -48.37 * 20.70-47.26 * 21.67 Hispanic -62.69 ** 22.95-28.97 25.84 Other non-white 8.66 24.67 20.35 25.14 # children -6.98 8.16 < 35 hrs/wk 4.32 43.64 > 45 hrs/wk -3.66 13.70 Mother's share of couple earnings -42.03 34.09 Mother not working -2.17 23.28 Mother < 35 hrs/wk 12.08 17.34 Aggravation -2.98 10.46 Support for involvement -15.91 20.36 Low educ expectations 7.13 14.47 High educ expectations -9.35 17.24 Mother's egalitarianism 25.72 * 10.00 23.55 * 9.95 Mother's support for involvement 42.93 * 16.64 27.30 16.46 Constant 6.07 44.73-6.51 48.38 45.31 47.62 45.69 44.40 69.75 55.10-135.89 102.50-98.59 79.61 Average χ 2 39.37 39.68 49.20 48.64 45.68 52.58 57.97 df 3 4 7 6 9 9 11 Prob < χ 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Table 3b OLS Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting Frequency of Affectionate Expressions and Talks with Child (N = 1114) Fatherhood timing a 0.13 * 0.06 0.18 * 0.08 0.09 0.07 0.11 0.06 0.11 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.04 0.06 Female child -0.02 0.06-0.02 0.06-0.02 0.06-0.02 0.06-0.01 0.06-0.02 0.06-0.02 0.06 Child's age -0.08 *** 0.01-0.07 *** 0.01-0.08 *** 0.01-0.08 *** 0.01-0.08 *** 0.01-0.08 *** 0.01-0.08 *** 0.01 Father's age -0.01 0.01 Less than HS -0.08 0.13 HS diploma -0.10 0.10 Some college -0.07 0.09 Family income (1000s) 0.00 0.00 Black -0.20 0.12-0.17 0.10 Hispanic -0.22 0.13-0.27 * 0.12 Other non-white -0.34 * 0.16-0.30 * 0.14 # children -0.03 0.04 < 35 hrs/wk 0.45 ** 0.16 0.41 ** 0.13 > 45 hrs/wk -0.03 0.07-0.03 0.07 Mother's share of couple earnings 0.06 0.16 Mother not working -0.05 0.13 Mother < 35 hrs/wk -0.03 0.08 Aggravation -0.13 ** 0.05-0.12 * 0.05 Support for involvement 0.37 ** 0.10 0.37 ** 0.09 Low educ expectations -0.02 0.08-0.02 0.07 High educ expectations 0.25 ** 0.08 0.26 ** 0.08 Wife's egalitarianism 0.09 0.05 Wife's support for involvement 0.11 0.08 Constant 4.04 *** 0.21 4.13 *** 0.22 4.21 *** 0.26 4.18 *** 0.22 4.15 *** 0.26 2.59 *** 0.46 3.27 *** 0.41 Average R 2 0.13 0.13 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.22 0.24

Table 3c Logistic Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting Involvement in Child's After-school Activities (N = 1114) Variable Odds ratio SE Odds ratio SE Odds ratio SE Odds ratio SE Odds ratio SE Odds ratio SE Odds ratio SE Fatherhood timing a 1.68 ** 0.28 2.08 ** 0.44 1.39 0.25 1.53 * 0.27 1.65 ** 0.28 1.43 * 0.24 1.31 0.24 Female child 0.80 0.12 0.78 0.12 0.79 0.12 0.78 0.12 0.79 0.12 0.76 0.12 0.72 * 0.12 Child's age 0.98 0.02 1.01 0.03 0.97 0.02 0.97 0.02 0.97 0.02 0.98 0.02 0.97 0.02 Father's age 0.97 0.02 Less than HS 0.29 ** 0.11 0.52 0.21 HS diploma 0.76 0.19 1.01 0.25 Some college 0.77 0.18 0.95 0.23 Family income (1000s) 1.00 0.00 Black 0.61 0.20 0.67 0.24 Hispanic 0.36 ** 0.12 0.50 0.19 Other non-white 0.48 0.20 0.51 0.22 # children 0.89 0.09 < 35 hrs/wk 0.60 0.24 > 45 hrs/wk 0.83 0.16 Mother's share of couple earnings 1.05 0.44 Mother not working 0.86 0.29 Mother < 35 hrs/wk 0.98 0.22 Aggravation 1.01 0.12 Support for involvement 1.25 0.33 Low educ expectations 0.54 ** 0.12 0.61 * 0.13 High educ expectations 1.27 0.26 1.49 * 0.30 Wife's egalitarianism 1.25 0.16 Wife's support for involvement 1.47 0.34 Average χ 2 14.51 16.17 30.38 30.59 19.45 36.73 42.05 df 3 4 7 6 9 9 11 Prob < χ 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00

Table 3d OLS Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting Frequency of Involvement in Father-Child Cognitive Activities (N = 1114) Fatherhood timing a 0.14 ** 0.05 0.22 ** 0.06 0.08 0.06 0.15 ** 0.05 0.13 * 0.05 0.11 0.06 0.17 ** 0.06 Female child -0.04 0.05-0.05 0.05-0.03 0.05-0.03 0.05-0.04 0.05-0.04 0.05-0.03 0.05 Child's age -0.11 *** 0.01-0.10 *** 0.01-0.12 *** 0.01-0.12 *** 0.01-0.11 *** 0.01-0.11 *** 0.01-0.10 *** 0.01 Father's age -0.01 * 0.00-0.01 ** 0.00 Less than HS -0.23 * 0.10-0.21 0.11 HS diploma -0.18 * 0.08-0.17 * 0.08 Some college -0.22 ** 0.07-0.21 ** 0.07 Family income (1000s) 0.00 0.00 Black 0.30 ** 0.11 0.36 ** 0.10 Hispanic -0.06 0.09 0.00 0.12 Other non-white -0.19 0.13-0.20 0.13 # children 0.00 0.03 < 35 hrs/wk 0.12 0.12 > 45 hrs/wk -0.06 0.06 Mother's share of couple earnings 0.11 0.14 Mother not working 0.03 0.10 Mother < 35 hrs/wk 0.06 0.07 Aggravation -0.01 0.04 Support for involvement 0.20 ** 0.07 0.22 ** 0.07 Low educ expectations -0.03 0.06-0.01 0.06 High educ expectations 0.14 * 0.07 0.13 0.07 Wife's egalitarianism 0.01 0.04 Wife's support for involvement 0.11 0.06 Constant 2.96 *** 0.19 3.09 *** 0.20 3.28 *** 0.20 2.95 *** 0.19 2.95 *** 0.21 1.95 *** 0.37 2.66 *** 0.31 Average R 2 0.29 0.29 0.30 0.30 0.29 0.32 0.34

Table 3e OLS Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting Frequency of Involvement in Father-Child Sports and Outdoor Activities (N = 1114) Fatherhood timing a 0.07 0.08 0.22 * 0.09 0.03 0.09 0.07 0.09 0.07 0.09 0.02 0.09 0.18 * 0.09 Female child -0.26 ** 0.08-0.28 *** 0.08-0.26 ** 0.08-0.27 ** 0.08-0.27 ** 0.08-0.28 ** 0.08-0.31 *** 0.08 Child's age -0.10 *** 0.01-0.07 *** 0.01-0.10 *** 0.01-0.10 *** 0.01-0.10 *** 0.01-0.09 *** 0.01-0.07 *** 0.01 Father's age -0.02 *** 0.01-0.03 *** 0.01 Less than HS -0.15 0.16 HS diploma 0.02 0.13 Some college 0.02 0.12 Family income (1000s) 0.00 0.00 Black -0.15 0.17-0.11 0.16 Hispanic -0.17 0.15-0.18 0.15 Other non-white -0.65 *** 0.18-0.63 ** 0.19 # children 0.00 0.05 < 35 hrs/wk -0.05 0.21 > 45 hrs/wk 0.01 0.09 Mother's share of couple earnings -0.07 0.22 Mother not working -0.17 0.16 Mother < 35 hrs/wk 0.01 0.10 Aggravation 0.00 0.06 Support for involvement 0.13 0.12 Low educ expectations -0.20 * 0.10-0.18 * 0.09 High educ expectations 0.18 0.12 0.25 0.11 Wife's egalitarianism -0.04 0.07 Wife's support for involvement 0.04 0.12 Constant 3.25 *** 0.28 3.52 *** 0.30 3.36 *** 0.33 3.35 *** 0.29 3.33 *** 0.34 2.91 *** 0.57 3.79 *** 0.31 Average R 2 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.13 0.12 0.13 0.16

Table 3f OLS Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting Frequency of Rule Enforcement (N = 1114) Fatherhood timing a -0.09 0.06-0.15 0.08-0.11 0.07-0.14 * 0.06-0.14 * 0.06-0.09 0.06-0.16 ** 0.06 Female child 0.02 0.05 0.02 0.05 0.02 0.05 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.05 0.01 0.05-0.01 0.05 Child's age 0.10 *** 0.01 0.09 *** 0.01 0.10 *** 0.01 0.10 *** 0.01 0.09 *** 0.01 0.09 *** 0.01 0.09 *** 0.01 Father's age 0.01 0.01 Less than HS -0.14 0.11 HS diploma 0.04 0.09 Some college -0.01 0.08 Family income (1000s) 0.00 0.00 Black -0.41 *** 0.09-0.41 *** 0.08 Hispanic -0.33 ** 0.10-0.20 * 0.10 Other non-white -0.24 0.12-0.25 * 0.12 # children -0.14 *** 0.03-0.11 *** 0.03 < 35 hrs/wk -0.03 0.14-0.03 0.13 > 45 hrs/wk 0.15 * 0.06 0.12 * 0.06 Mother's share of couple earnings 0.09 0.14 Mother not working -0.11 0.10 Mother < 35 hrs/wk 0.05 0.07 Aggravation -0.01 0.04 Support for involvement -0.27 ** 0.09-0.27 ** 0.08 Low educ expectations 0.05 0.07 High educ expectations 0.00 0.07 Wife's egalitarianism 0.10 * 0.05 0.07 0.05 Wife's support for involvement -0.07 0.07 Constant 1.70 *** 0.21 1.61 *** 0.22 1.78 *** 0.25 1.94 *** 0.21 2.08 *** 0.26 2.60 *** 0.43 2.98 *** 0.37 Average R 2 0.21 0.21 0.22 0.24 0.25 0.24 0.29

Table 4 Change in Fatherhood Timing Coefficient Compared to Baseline Model (with Significance Tests) Father's age Class Race Constraint/ exchange Attitudes Final Outcome 1-2 1-3 1-4 1-5 1-6 1-7 Interaction time with mother absent d 7.147 12.029 9.314 5.028 4.857 16.289 S(d) a 10.813 5.924 2.671 3.913 4.108 5.066 t 0.661 2.031 3.487 1.285 1.182 3.215 Affection and talks with child d -0.050 0.044 0.023 0.019 0.071 0.093 S(d) 0.057 0.039 0.021 0.019 0.024 0.025 t -0.877 1.139 1.090 1.007 2.956 3.791 After-school activities d -0.213 0.185 0.093 0.018 0.158 0.247 S(d) 0.135 0.062 0.039 0.031 0.038 0.076 t -1.582 2.969 2.387 0.581 4.170 3.262 Cognitive activities d -0.072 0.061-0.012 0.008 0.038-0.024 S(d) 0.031 0.025 0.018 0.017 0.021 0.045 t -2.339 2.451-0.659 0.498 1.810-0.543 Sports and outdoor activities d -0.154 b b b b -0.113 S(d) 0.034 0.045 t -4.517-2.508 Monitoring d b b 0.044 0.038 b 0.060 S(d) 0.021 0.019 0.025 t 2.098 1.976 2.440 a For formula, see Clogg, Petkova, & Haritou (1995) b Not calculated because the coefficient is not significant in either the baseline or the larger model.