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