Table 2 Mixed effects models predicting... | Emerald Publishing

Table 2

Mixed effects models predicting hiring endorsement of hypothetical candidates, study 1

	Model 1			Model 2
Coefficient	β	t	p	β	t	p
Intercept	−0.64	−27.21	<0.001	−0.64	−29.21	<0.001
Agentic goals	0.21	8.94	<0.001	0.16	6.55	<0.001
Communal goals	−0.13	−5.70	<0.001	−0.06	−2.23	0.03
Conventionally moral candidates	1.29	45.29	<0.001	1.29	45.84	<0.001
Agentic goals × Conventionally moral candidates interaction	−0.20	−6.59	<0.001	−0.13	−4.35	<0.001
Communal goals × Conventionally moral candidates interaction	0.28	9.44	<0.001	0.19	5.75	<0.001
Participant dark personality				0.17	6.94	<0.001
Participant dark personality × Conventionally moral interaction				−0.21	−6.77	<0.001
Conditional R²	0.504			0.516

	Model 1			Model 2
Coefficient	β	t	p	β	t	p
Intercept	−0.64	−27.21	<0.001	−0.64	−29.21	<0.001
Agentic goals	0.21	8.94	<0.001	0.16	6.55	<0.001
Communal goals	−0.13	−5.70	<0.001	−0.06	−2.23	0.03
Conventionally moral candidates	1.29	45.29	<0.001	1.29	45.84	<0.001
Agentic goals × Conventionally moral candidates interaction	−0.20	−6.59	<0.001	−0.13	−4.35	<0.001
Communal goals × Conventionally moral candidates interaction	0.28	9.44	<0.001	0.19	5.75	<0.001
Participant dark personality				0.17	6.94	<0.001
Participant dark personality × Conventionally moral interaction				−0.21	−6.77	<0.001
Conditional R²	0.504			0.516

Indirect effects of influence strategies through managerial goals (see Figures 1 and 2)
	β	z	P
Dark personality candidates
Dominance-orientation through agentic goals	0.06	3.60	<0.001
Dominance-orientation through communal goals	0.004	0.87	0.38
Conventionally moral candidates
Dominance-orientation through agentic goals	0.02	1.16	0.25
Dominance-orientation through communal goals	−0.02	−1.99	0.046

Indirect effects of influence strategies through managerial goals (see Figures 1 and 2)
	β	z	P
Dark personality candidates
Dominance-orientation through agentic goals	0.06	3.60	<0.001
Dominance-orientation through communal goals	0.004	0.87	0.38
Conventionally moral candidates
Dominance-orientation through agentic goals	0.02	1.16	0.25
Dominance-orientation through communal goals	−0.02	−1.99	0.046