Skip to main content

Table 4 Cross-lagged and autoregressive unstandardised estimates of aggressive and prosocial behaviour, and treatment effects

From: The developmental relation between aggressive behaviour and prosocial behaviour: A 5-year longitudinal study

  Teacher Parent Child
  B B B
Cross-lagged    
Aggressive (7) → Prosocial (8) -.053* -.149*** -.079***
Aggrresive (8) → Prosocial (9) -.102*** -.089*** -.034¥
Aggressive (9) → Prosocial (11) -.092** -.073* -.014
Prosocial (7) → Aggressive (8) -.025 -.028 -.018
Prosocial (8) → Aggressive (9) -.033 -.025 .012
Prosocial (9) → Aggressive (11) -.015 -.030 .039
Autoregressive    
Aggressive (7) → Aggressive (8) .633*** .713*** .371***
Aggressive (8) → Aggressive (9) .624*** .686*** .469***
Aggressive (9) → Aggressive (11) .377*** .557*** .453***
Prososcial (7) → Prosocial (8) .598*** .575*** .269***
Prosocial (8) → Prosocial (9) .617*** .641*** .371***
Prosocial (9) → Prosocial (11) .265*** .618*** .291***
Triple P    
Aggressive (8) .060* .001 -.014¥
Aggressive (9) .001 -.001 -.006
Aggressive (11) -.038 .008 -.014
Prosocial (8) .063¥ -.006 .002
Prosocial (9) -.159*** -.001 -.008
Prosocial (11) -.022 .026 .002
Paths    
Aggressive (9) .029 -.010 .006
Aggressive (11) -.027 -.013 -.009
Prosocial (9) -.019 -.031 -.015*
Prosocial (11) -.053 .048¥ .003
  1. Note: The numbers in brackets indicate age at time of measurement. The presented coefficients are ustandardised estimates recommended by Kline (1998) to be used when reporting results in AMOS, as only those (and not the standardised estimates) are affected by identification constraints (Arbuckle, 1995).
  2. ***p < .001, **p < .01; *p < .05; ¥ < .10.