Skip to main content

Table 5 Mediation analyses with T0 risk perception as independent variable and symptom expectation as mediator

From: Does precautionary information about electromagnetic fields trigger nocebo responses? An experimental risk communication study

  

Coefficient

ANOVA

Sobel test

Dependent variable

Path

b-weight; t (p)

F (p)

R2

Indirect effect, b-weight (95% CI)

Z (p)

Symptom difference

a

.15; 3.69 (<.001)

13.65 (< .001)

.09

  

b

.14; 3.71 (<.001)

17.65 (<.001)

.21

.02

(.008, .043)

2.57 (.01)

c’

.06; 3.3 (.001)

c

.08; 4.44 (<.001)

19.70 (<.001)

.13

Attributed symptoms

b

.16; 5.69 (<.001)

20.56 (<.001)

.23

.02

(.009, .048)

3.07 (.002)

c’

.02; 1.09 (.28)

c

.04; 2.66 (.008)

7.08 (.008)

.05

Belief to perceive sham EMF

b

1.23; 4.40 (<.001)

23.77 (<.001)

.26

.19

(.007, .364)

2.79 (.005)

c’

.52; 3.72 (<.001)

c

.70; 4.98 (<.001)

24.78 (<.001)

.16