Crystal Smit

Chapter 4 80 Table 4.3 Results for the model testing mean-level differences between conditions on water and SSB consumption after the intervention ( N = 451) Water consumption SSB consumption b SE β p CI b SE β p CI Regression paths Active control [1] vs. SNI [0]—Behavior T2 -.02 .18 -.01 .936 -0.20 – 0.19 -.03 .06 -.04 .633 -0.18 – 0.11 Control [1] vs. SNI [0]—Behavior T2 -.17 .31 -.09 .589 -0.43 – 0.24 .20 .10 .25 .035 0.02 – 0.48 Active control [1] vs. SNI [0]—Behavior T3 -.31 .25 -.16 .217 -0.40 – 0.09 .17 .10 .20 .061 -0.01 – 0.40 Control [1] vs. SNI [0]—Behavior T3 -.20 .20 -.10 .308 -0.29 – 0.09 .19 .13 .21 .131 -0.06 – 0.49 Stability paths Behavior T1— Behavior T2 .51 .06 .47 <.001 0.36 – 0.58 .51 .06 .49 <.001 0.32 – 0.66 Behavior T2— Behavior T3 .62 .05 .58 <.001 0.5 – 0.64 .62 .05 .64 <.001 0.46 – 0.82 Control variables Sex a —Behavior T2 -.00 .16 -.00 .977 -0.08 – 0.08 -.00 .16 -.08 .119 -0.18 – 0.02 Sex a —Behavior T3 .02 .24 .01 .923 -0.11 – 0.12 .02 .24 -.03 .431 -0.10 – 0.04 Note. b , unstandardized regression coefficient estimating the mean-level difference between conditions, adjusted for previous consumption; SE , standard error; β , standardized regression coefficient; CI, 95% confidence interval; SNI, social network intervention; T1, Time 1; T2, Time 2; T3, Time 3; a 0 = boy, 1 = girl; numbers in parentheses represent the binary dummy coded values; SNI is the reference category in the model. The model showed that there was a significant mean-level difference between the social network intervention and control condition on SSB consumption at T2, adjusting for baseline SSB consumption ( b = .20, SE = .10, β = .25, p = .035, 95% CI [0.02, 0.48]). This indicated that, immediately after the intervention, children exposed to the social network intervention consumed an average of .20 glasses less SSB per day than those in the control condition, adjusting for SSB consumption prior to the intervention. At T3, there was a marginally significant mean-level difference between the social network intervention and active control condition on SSB consumption, adjusted for baseline SSB consumption ( b = .17, SE = .10, β = .20, p = .061, 95% CI [-0.01, 0.40]). This indicated that there was a trend showing that, four weeks after the start of the intervention, children exposed to the social network intervention consumed an average of .17 glasses less SSB per day than children in the active control condition (adjusting for SSB consumption at T1). For