Table 1
Single-group confirmatory factor analysis model fit.
| # | GROUP | N | FACTORS | χ2 | df | p | χ2/df | RMSEA | SRMR | CFI | TLI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Female studentsa | 179 | 2 4 | 268.56 62.17 | 52 47 | <.001 .068 | 5.16 1.32 | .15 .04 | .14 .04 | .75 .98 | .68 .98 |
| 2 | Male studentsa | 169 | 2 4 | 299.37 63.51 | 52 47 | <.001 .054 | 5.76 1.35 | .17 .05 | .08 .04 | .69 .98 | .60 .97 |
| 3 | Students with chronic illnessa | 156 | 2 4 | 80.48 57.61 | 52 47 | .007 .138 | 1.55 1.23 | .06 .04 | .05 .04 | .95 .98 | .94 .97 |
| 4 | Students with disabilitya | 169 | 2 4 | 109.41 62.12 | 52 47 | <.001 .068 | 2.10 1.32 | .08 .04 | .08 .05 | .92 .98 | .90 .97 |
| 5 | Students with childrena, b | 166 | 2 4 | 73.68 58.33 | 52 47 | .026 .124 | 1.42 1.24 | .05 .04 | .05 .04 | .97 .98 | .96 .98 |
| 6 | Full-time employed studentsa, b | 163 | 2 4 | 86.13 57.43 | 52 47 | .002 .141 | 1.66 1.22 | .06 .04 | .06 .06 | .96 .98 | .95 .98 |
| 7 | Part-time employed students | 170 | 2 4 | 122.18 96.34 | 52 47 | <.001 <.001 | 2.35 2.05 | .09 .08 | .09 .10 | .92 .94 | .90 .92 |
| 8 | Older studentsa,b | 165 | 2 4 | 82.54 69.53 | 52 47 | .005 .018 | 1.59 1.48 | .06 .05 | .07 .06 | .96 .97 | .95 .96 |
| 9 | Younger studentsa | 160 | 2 4 | 104.29 68.05 | 52 47 | <.001 .024 | 2.01 1.45 | .08 .05 | .07 .05 | .90 .96 | .88 .95 |
| 10 | Students qualified by an apprenticeship/joba | 155 | 2 4 | 94.19 74.13 | 52 47 | <.001 .007 | 1.81 1.58 | .07 .06 | .07 .06 | .95 .97 | .93 .95 |
| 11 | Students with migration backgrounda, b | 186 | 2 4 | 82.04 66.91 | 52 47 | .005 .030 | 1.58 1.42 | .06 .05 | .03 .03 | .98 .98 | .97 .98 |
| 12 | Students without migration backgrounda, b | 151 | 2 4 | 85.35 71.48 | 52 47 | .002 .012 | 1.64 1.82 | .07 .06 | .03 .03 | .96 .97 | .95 .96 |
| 13 | Students with non-German native languagea, b | 170 | 2 4 | 87.53 68.65 | 52 47 | .002 .021 | 1.68 1.46 | .06 .05 | .04 .04 | .96 .98 | .95 .96 |
| 14 | First-degree students | 185 | 2 4 | 162.67 119.73 | 52 47 | <.001 <.001 | 3.13 2.55 | .11 .09 | .07 .07 | .89 .92 | .85 .89 |
| 15 | Second-degree students | 160 | 2 4 | 203.13 161.65 | 52 47 | <.001 <.001 | 3.91 3.44 | .14 .12 | .07 .06 | .85 .89 | .81 .84 |
[i] Note: Factor structures of the two- and four-factor model are depicted in Figure 1 and Figure S2. Letters in superscript denote groups included in further analyses with the four-factora or two-factorb model, respectively.
Figure 1
SEM of the four-factor model including all indicators and significant standardized estimates.
Table 2
Rank order of latent mean values across social groups.
| RANK | FRIENDLINESS | MORALITY | CONSCIENTIOUSNESS | ABILITY | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| # | GROUP | LATENT MEAN VALUES | GROUPS WITH SIGNIFICANTLY SMALLER FACTOR MEANS | # | GROUP | LATENT MEAN VALUES | GROUPS WITH SIGNIFICANTLY SMALLER FACTOR MEANS | # | GROUP | LATENT MEAN VALUES | GROUPS WITH SIGNIFICANTLY SMALLER FACTOR MEANS | # | GROUP | LATENT MEAN VALUES | GROUPS WITH SIGNIFICANTLY SMALLER FACTOR MEANS | |
| 1 | 1 | Female students | 0.00 | 8, 11, 3, 13, 9, 10, 2, 12, 6 | 4 | Students with disability | 0.15 | 3, 6, 10, 11, 12, 13, 2, 9 | 1 | Female students | 0.00 | 6, 8, 5, 10, 4, 11, 12, 13, 3, 9, 2 | 6 | Full-time employed students | 0.15 | 2, 8, 5, 10, 12, 11, 3, 13, 4, 9 |
| 2 | 4 | Students with disability | –0.23 | 8, 11, 3, 13, 9, 10, 2, 12, 6 | 5 | Students with children | 0.08 | 3, 6, 10, 11, 12, 13, 2, 9 | 6 | Full-time employed students | –0.39 | 8, 5, 10, 4, 11, 12, 13, 3, 9, 2 | 1 | Female students | 0.00 | 5, 10, 12, 11, 3, 13, 4, 9 |
| 3 | 5 | Students with children | –0.25 | 11, 3, 13, 9, 10, 2, 12, 6 | 7 | Older students | 0.02 | 3, 6, 10, 11, 12, 13, 2, 9 | 7 | Older students | –0.93 | 4, 11, 12, 13, 3, 9, 2 | 2 | Male students | –0.14 | 5, 10, 12, 11, 3, 13, 4, 9 |
| 4 | 7 | Older students | –0.50 | 10, 2, 12, 6 | 1 | Female students | 0.00 | 3, 6, 10, 11, 12, 13, 2, 9 | 5 | Students with children | –0.99 | 4, 11, 12, 13, 3, 9, 2 | 7 | Older students | –0.19 | 5, 10, 12, 11, 3, 13, 4, 9 |
| 5 | 10 | Students with migration background | –0.67 | 12, 6 | 3 | Students with chronic illness | –0.36 | 9 | 9 | Students qualified by an apprenticeship/job | –1.12 | 4, 11, 12, 13, 3, 9, 2 | 5 | Students with children | –0.45 | 9 |
| 6 | 3 | Students with chronic illness | –0.73 | 6 | 6 | Full-time employed students | –0.36 | 9 | 4 | Students with disability | –1.45 | 9, 2 | 9 | Students qualified by an apprenticeship/job | –0.46 | |
| 7 | 12 | Students with non-German native language | –0.74 | 6 | 9 | Students qualified by an apprenticeship/job | –0.38 | 9 | 10 | Students with migration background | –1.55 | 9, 2 | 11 | Students without migration background | –0.47 | |
| 8 | 8 | Younger students | –0.78 | 6 | 10 | Students with migration background | –0.51 | 11 | Students without migration background | –1.57 | 9, 2 | 10 | Students with migration background | –0.48 | ||
| 9 | 9 | Students qualified by an apprenticeship/job | –0.80 | 6 | 11 | Students without migration background | –0.52 | 12 | Students with non-German native language | –1.62 | 9, 2 | 3 | Students with chronic illness | –0.65 | ||
| 10 | 2 | Male students | –0.93 | 12 | Students with non-German native language | –0.52 | 3 | Students with chronic illness | –1.65 | 9, 2 | 12 | Students with non-German native language | –0.65 | |||
| 11 | 11 | Students without migration background | –1.00 | 2 | Male students | –0.59 | 8 | Younger students | –2.23 | 4 | Students with disability | –0.66 | ||||
| 12 | 6 | Full-time employed students | –1.08 | 8 | Younger students | –0.67 | 2 | Male students | –2.56 | 8 | Younger students | –0.74 | ||||
[i] Note: Significance testing was conducted at a 5% significance level (two-sided). Due to the fixed alignment optimization model, the mean value of female students was fixed to zero. The two italic groups’ values should not be interpreted on morality due to Heywood cases.
Figure 2
Latent mean values of friendiness, morality, and conscientiousness for student groups.
Note: Scaling was achieved by constraining latent mean values of female students to zero. *Denotes warnings indicating Heywood cases.
Table 3
Results of the SEM.
| CONTEMPT | ADMIRATION | PITY | ENVY | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| β[95% CI] | SE | p | β [95% CI] | SE | p | β [95% CI] | SE | p | β [95% CI] | SE | p | |
| Friendliness | .42 [.10; .73] | 0.16 | .010 | –.09 [–.37; .19] | 0.14 | .525 | .11 [–.14; .37] | 0.13 | .395 | .22 [–.07; .52] | 0.15 | .137 |
| Morality | –.52 [–.87; –.16] | 0.18 | .004 | .10 [–.21; .41] | 0.16 | .516 | .18 [–.11; .46] | 0.15 | .226 | –.59 [–.92; –.26] | 0.17 | .001 |
| Ability | –.08 [–.19; .04] | 0.06 | .189 | .26 [.15; .36] | 0.05 | <.001 | –.40 [–.49; –.31] | 0.05 | <.001 | .31 [.20; .43] | 0.06 | <.001 |
| Conscientiousness | –.04 [–.14; .06] | 0.05 | .459 | .12 [.02; .21] | 0.05 | .021 | .09 [–.00; .18] | 0.05 | .056 | .10 [–.00; .20] | 0.05 | .057 |
| ACTIVE FACILITATION | ACTIVE HARM | PASSIVE FACILITATION | PASSIVE HARM | |||||||||
| β[95% CI] | SE | p | β [95% CI] | SE | p | β [95% CI] | SE | p | β [95% CI] | SE | p | |
| Friendliness | .35 [.02; .68] | 0.17 | .038 | –.17 [–.44; .09] | 0.13 | .194 | .28 [–.02; .59] | 0.15 | .066 | .03 [–.29; .35] | 0.16 | .839 |
| Morality | –.13 [–.51; .25] | 0.19 | .497 | .07 [–.24; .38] | 0.16 | .656 | –.14 [–.48; .20] | 0.17 | .426 | –.11 [–.47; .25] | 0.19 | .558 |
| Ability | .21 [.08; .35] | 0.07 | .002 | –.22 [–.33; –.12] | 0.06 | <.001 | .44 [.32; .56] | 0.06 | <.001 | –.16 [–.28; –.04] | 0.06 | .011 |
| Conscientiousness | .06 [–.05; .16] | 0.05 | .273 | .12 [.04; .21] | 0.04 | .005 | –.01 [–.11; .09] | 0.05 | .836 | .04 [–.06; .14] | 0.05 | .445 |
| Contempt | –.20 [–.26; –.14] | 0.03 | <.001 | .44 [.39; .50] | 0.03 | <.001 | –.23 [–.30; –.17] | 0.03 | <.001 | .42 [.36; .47] | 0.03 | <.001 |
| Admiration | .09 [.03; .14] | 0.03 | .003 | –.10 [–.14; –.05] | 0.03 | <.001 | .14 [.08; .19] | 0.03 | <.001 | –.07 [–.12; –.02] | 0.03 | .006 |
| Pity | –.02 [–.08; .03] | 0.03 | .452 | .13 [.08; .18] | 0.03 | <.001 | –.13 [–.19; –.08] | 0.03 | <.001 | .14 [.09; .19] | 0.03 | <.001 |
| Envy | –.13 [–.19; –.07] | 0.03 | <.001 | .16 [.11; .22] | 0.03 | <.001 | –.01 [–.07; .05] | 0.03 | .756 | .12 [.07; .18] | 0.03 | <.001 |
| SPECIFIC INDIRECT EFFECTS ON ACTIVE FACILITATION | ||||||||||||
| VIA CONTEMPT | VIA ADMIRATION | VIA PITY | VIA ENVY | |||||||||
| β[95% CI] | SE | p | β [95% CI] | SE | p | β [95% CI] | SE | p | β [95% CI] | SE | p | |
| Friendliness | –.08 [–.15; –.01] | 0.04 | .022 | –.01 [–.03; .02] | 0.01 | .538 | –.00 [–.01; .01] | 0.00 | .584 | –.03 [–.07; .01] | 0.02 | .185 |
| Morality | .10 [.02; .18] | 0.04 | .012 | .01 [–.02; .04] | 0.01 | .529 | –.00 [–.02; .01] | 0.01 | .513 | .08 [.02; .13] | 0.03 | .014 |
| Ability | .02 [–.01; .04] | 0.01 | .189 | .02 [.01; .04] | 0.01 | .013 | .01 [–.01; .03] | 0.01 | .454 | –.04 [–.06; –.02] | 0.01 | .002 |
| Conscientiousness | .01 [–.01; .03] | 0.01 | .467 | .01 [–.00; .02] | 0.01 | .063 | –.00 [–.01; .00] | 0.00 | .483 | –.01 [–.03; .00] | 0.01 | .088 |
| SPECIFIC INDIRECT EFFECTS ON ACTIVE HARM | ||||||||||||
| VIA CONTEMPT | VIA ADMIRATION | VIA PITY | VIA ENVY | |||||||||
| β[95% CI] | SE | p | β [95% CI] | SE | p | β [95% CI] | SE | p | β [95% CI] | SE | p | |
| Friendliness | .18 [.04; .33] | 0.07 | .013 | .01 [–.02; .04] | 0.01 | .538 | .01 [–.02; .05] | 0.02 | .405 | .04 [–.02; .09] | 0.03 | .162 |
| Morality | –.23 [–.39; –.07] | 0.08 | .005 | –.01 [–.04; .02] | 0.02 | .529 | .02 [–.02; .06] | 0.02 | .236 | –.10 [–.16; –.03] | 0.03 | .005 |
| Ability | –.03 [–.08; .02] | 0.03 | .185 | –.02 [–.04; –.01] | 0.01 | .002 | –.05 [–.08; –.03] | 0.01 | <.001 | .05 [.03; .08] | 0.01 | <.001 |
| Conscientiousness | –.02 [–.06; .03] | 0.02 | .462 | –.01 [–.02; .00] | 0.01 | .053 | .01 [–.00; .02] | 0.01 | .080 | .02 [–.02; .03] | 0.01 | .077 |
| SPECIFIC INDIRECT EFFECTS ON PASSIVE FACILITATION | ||||||||||||
| VIA CONTEMPT | VIA ADMIRATION | VIA PITY | VIA ENVY | |||||||||
| β[95% CI] | SE | p | β [95% CI] | SE | p | β [95% CI] | SE | p | β [95% CI] | SE | p | |
| Friendliness | –.10 [–.18; –.02] | 0.04 | .019 | –.01 [–.05; .03] | 0.02 | .529 | –.01 [–.05; .02] | 0.02 | .404 | –.00 [–.02; .01] | 0.01 | .768 |
| Morality | .12 [.03; .21] | 0.05 | .009 | .01 [–.03; .06] | 0.02 | .521 | –.02 [–.06; .02] | 0.02 | .242 | .01 [–.03; .04] | 0.02 | .761 |
| Ability | .02 [–.01; .05] | 0.01 | .187 | .04 [.02; .05] | 0.01 | .001 | .05 [.03; .08] | 0.01 | <.001 | –.00 [–.02; .02] | 0.01 | .757 |
| Conscientiousness | .01 [–.02; .03] | 0.01 | .467 | .02 [.00; .03] | 0.01 | .041 | –.01 [–.02; .00] | 0.01 | .068 | –.00 [–.01; .01] | 0.00 | .762 |
| SPECIFIC INDIRECT EFFECTS ON PASSIVE HARM | ||||||||||||
| VIA CONTEMPT | VIA ADMIRATION | VIA PITY | VIA ENVY | |||||||||
| β[95% CI] | SE | p | β [95% CI] | SE | p | β [95% CI] | SE | p | β [95% CI] | SE | p | |
| Friendliness | .17 [.04; .31] | 0.07 | .011 | .01 [–.01; .03] | 0.01 | .537 | .02 [–.02; .05] | 0.02 | .396 | .03 [–.01; .07] | 0.02 | .165 |
| Morality | –.22 [–.37; –.07] | 0.08 | .005 | –.01 [–.03; .02] | 0.01 | .527 | .02 [–.02; .07] | 0.02 | .246 | –.07 [–.13; –.02] | 0.03 | .008 |
| Ability | –.03 [–.08; .02] | 0.02 | .189 | –.02 [–.03; –.00] | 0.01 | .021 | –.06 [–.08; –.03] | 0.01 | <.001 | .04 [.02; .06] | 0.01 | .001 |
| Conscientiousness | –.02 [–.06; .03] | 0.02 | .461 | –.01 [–.02; .00] | 0.01 | .079 | .01 [–.00; .03] | 0.01 | .074 | .01 [–.00; .03] | 0.01 | .088 |
[i] Note: N = 626 participants, N = 1989 observations.