DataPDF Available

No Pain No Gain Supplemental Materials

Supplemental Materials to Aelenei, Lewis, & Oyserman (2017) - No Pain, No Gain
Study 1 Regression Tables
Interpretation of Experienced Difficulty as Importance
Table 1a: Influence of Study Number, Education, Race, and the Race x Education interaction
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
95% CI for B
Model
b
(B)
t
p
Lower
Upper
Intercept
4.26
53.66
.000
4.09
4.41
Study Number
-.03
-.05
-1.66
.097
-.06
.01
Education
.16
.11
2.66
.008
.04
.28
Race
-.13
-.07
-2.31
.021
-.23
-.02
Race x Education Interaction
-.23
-.16
-3.77
.000
-.35
-.11
Note: Study Number controls for which of the seven unrelated studies the data came from.
Table 1b: Influence of Education, Race, and the Race x Education interaction
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
95% CI for B
Model
b
S.E (b)
(B)
t
p
Lower
Upper
Intercept
4.16
.05
78.82
.000
4.05
4.26
Education
.16
.06
.11
2.68
.008
.04
.28
Race
-.13
.05
-.07
-2.36
.018
-.23
-.02
Race x Education Interaction
-.23
.06
-.16
-3.77
.000
-.35
-.11
Note: When Study Number is not included, effects of Education and Race are not changed.
Interpretation of Experienced Difficulty as Impossibility
Table 2a: Influence of Study Number, Education, Race, and the Race x Education interaction
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
95% CI for B
Model
b
S.E (b)
(B)
t
p
Lower
Upper
Intercept
3.20
.08
42.08
.000
3.05
3.35
Study Number
.03
.02
.05
1.51
.133
-.01
.06
Education
.01
.06
.01
.21
.833
-.10
.13
Race
-.08
.05
-.05
-1.65
.099
-.18
.02
Race x Education Interaction
-.09
.06
-.07
-1.56
.120
-.20
.02
Note: Study Number controls for which of the seven unrelated studies the data came from.
Table 2b: Influence of Education, Race, and the Race x Education interaction
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
95% CI for B
Model
b
S.E (b)
(B)
t
p
Lower
Upper
Intercept
3.29
.05
64.98
.000
3.19
3.38
Education
.01
.06
.01
.20
.843
-.10
.13
Race
-.08
.05
-.05
-1.60
.109
-.18
.02
Race x Education Interaction
-.09
.06
-.07
-1.55
.122
-.20
.02
Note: When Study Number is not included, effects of Education and Race are not changed.
Study 2 Supplementary analysis on the relation between Academic motives for college and
GPA
Given that Academic Motives for College score was not correlated with the GPA in the
control group (r = .11, p = .225), we did not include this variable in our main analyses. However,
we noticed a positive correlation between Academic Motives for College score and GPA in the
full sample (r = .17 p = .003). Therefore we unpacked this correlation by condition and found a
significant positive correlation between the Academic motives for college and GPA in the
interpretation of difficulty as importance condition (r = .268, p = .019), not the interpretation of
difficulty as impossibility condition (r = .192, p = .095). We interpret the positive correlation
between Academic Motives for College and GPA in the interpretation of difficulty as importance
condition as an effect of condition on students’ autobiographical recall. Our reasoning was that
when presented with the interpretation of difficulty as importance items, students tended to
endorse this interpretation of experienced difficulty with schoolwork. Given that they had just
agreed that schoolwork in college might be difficult because it is important, students might
adjust their autobiographical recall of their motives for college to more closely reflect their GPA.
Having just agreed that difficulty means that schoolwork is important, students with poorer
GPAs may infer that their motives for college were not strongly academically driven.

File (1)

Content uploaded by Neil Lewis Jr
Author content
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.