Logistic regression resultsa
| Variables | Model 1 | Model 2 |
|---|---|---|
| Control | ||
| Age | 0 | 0 |
| Gender | 0.05 | −0.01 |
| Years of management experience | 0.03 | 0.02 |
| Independent | ||
| Retributive orientation | 0.80** | |
| Reparative orientation | −0.32** | |
| Seriousness of wrongdoing | 0.11 | |
| Anger | 0.18** | |
| Moral outrage | −0.08 | |
| Sympathy | −0.06 | |
| χ2 | 3.82 | 197.15** |
| Nagelkerke R2 | 0.01 | 0.28 |
| Variables | Model 1 | Model 2 |
|---|---|---|
| Age | 0 | 0 |
| Gender | 0.05 | −0.01 |
| Years of management experience | 0.03 | 0.02 |
| Retributive orientation | 0.80** | |
| Reparative orientation | −0.32** | |
| Seriousness of wrongdoing | 0.11 | |
| Anger | 0.18** | |
| Moral outrage | −0.08 | |
| Sympathy | −0.06 | |
| 3.82 | 197.15** | |
| Nagelkerke | 0.01 | 0.28 |
Notes:
N = 894; the values shown within each model are B(log odds); athe dependent variable is managers’ restorative versus punishment response; *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01
Sharing content requires targeting cookies to be enabled. Please update your cookie preferences to use this feature.