Table 4

Hierarchical regression model explaining the variance in children's fruit intake (n = 765).

step 1

step 2

step 3

step 4

Beta

P-value

Beta

P-value

Beta

P-value

Beta

P-value


    background variables

Gender

0.12

< 0.01

0.10

< 0.01

0.08

0.02

0.03

0.38

Residence

0.03

0.46

0.05

0.15

0.05

0.12

0.03

0.32

SES mother

0.07

0.08

0.06

0.11

0.06

0.11

0.01

0.71

SES father

0.06

0.09

0.04

0.25

0.04

0.23

0.04

0.22

    perceived physical-environmental

Availability at home

0.27

< 0.01

0.20

< 0.01

0.08

0.04

Availability at school

0.00

0.90

-0.01

0.74

-0.01

0.77

    perceived socio-environmental

Modelling

0.14

< 0.01

0.07

> 0.05

Active encouragement

-0.11

0.01

-0.14

< 0.01

Demand family rule

0.21

< 0.01

0.16

< 0.01

Allow family rule

-0.01

0.83

-0.04

0.25

    personal

Knowledge

0.17

< 0.01

Attitudes

0.04

0.27

Liking

0.12

0.01

Self-efficacy

0.23

< 0.01

Preferences

0.12

< 0.01

Perceived barriers

-0.05

0.17

adjusted R2

0.019

0.088

0.130

0.312

R2 change

0.024

< 0.01

0.071

< 0.01

0.046

< 0.01

0.185

< 0.01


Kristjansdottir et al. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity 2006 3:41   doi:10.1186/1479-5868-3-41

Open Data