Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 2 Fixed and random parameters of the three-level life satisfaction model

From: The role of community social capital in the relationship between socioeconomic status and adolescent life satisfaction: mediating or moderating? Evidence from Czech data

  Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4
  B (S.E.) B (S.E.) B (S.E.) B (S.E.)
Fixed effects
 Constant 7.499 (0.036)*** 7.900 (0.064)*** 7.799 (0.063)*** 7.725 (0.060)***
Individual-level
 Socio-demographics
  Female    −0.201 (0.056)** −0.092 (0.054)n.s. −0.073 (0.053)n.s.
  Age (ref: 11)
  13    −0.312 (0.079)** −0.295 (0.077)** −0.245 (0.073)**
  15    −0.548 (0.078)** −0.439 (0.076)** −0.304 (0.074)**
 Socioeconomics
  Family affluence      0.096 (0.016)** 0.077 (0.016)**
  Perceived wealth      0.538 (0.037)** 0.446 (0.036)**
 Social capital
  Structural social capital        0.033 (0.021)n.s.
  Cognitive social capital        0.689 (0.041)**
Class-level
 -         
School-level
 -         
Random effects
 Individual-level variance 3.253 (0.072)*** 3.250 (0.073)*** 3.002 (0.067)*** 2.813 (0.064)***
 Class-level variance 0.124 (0.028)** 0.058 (0.028)* 0.057 (0.026)* 0.047 (0.024)*
 School-level variance 0.000 (0.000)n.s. 0.009 (0.018)n.s. 0.011 (0.017)n.s. 0.005 (0.015)n.s.
 Log likelihood 17281.1   17156.0   16611.4   16112.9  
 Δ Log likelihood (Δ df)    125.1 (3) 544.6 (2) 489.5 (2)
 p    < .001   < .001   < .001  
  1. Figures in parentheses represent standard errors
  2. n.s. not significant
  3. *p < 0,05, **p < 0,01, ***p < 0,001