Skip to main content

Table 3 Perceived influence on eating by perceived comparison category for each network

From: Perceived influence and college students’ diet and physical activity behaviors: an examination of ego-centric social networks

Networks

Comparison categories

Comparison to Nominee’s eating behaviors, N (%)a

Influence on eating, Mean (SD)

χ 2 (p-value)b

Family

Better

41 (35.3)

6.44 (2.56)

23.27 (<0.001)

Same as

30 (25.9)

4.43 (2.50)

Worse

45 (38.8)

3.93 (2.34)

College Friends

Better

44 (42.3)

3.11 (1.86)

2.93 (0.23)

Same as

38 (36.5)

3.03 (2.24)

Worse

22 (21.2)

2.59 (2.49)

High School Friends

Better

35 (40.2)

2.40 (1.74)

1.61 (0.45)

Same as

29 (33.3)

2.55 (2.10)

Worse

23 (26.4)

1.65 (0.82)

Significant Others

Better

3 (16.7)

5.67 (2.08)

7.71 (0.02)

Same as

8 (44.4)

9.25 (1.04)

Worse

7 (38.9)

5.86 (3.24)

  1. aPercentages add up to 100 within each cell
  2. bKruskal-Wallis test of mean influence on eating across three comparison categories, two-tailed tests for significance