Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(1)
Exact(3)
Knowledge was dichotomized as low level (knowing 0 to 2 protective behaviours) versus high level (knowing more than 2 behaviours).
In year 2, the SAI factor SELF-CONTROL (incorporating + r estraint,-permissiveness, -antisocial behaviour) (p < .05 to p < .001) and conscientiousness (p < .05 to p < .01) predict some positive behaviours of individuals, while the individual traits permissiveness and anti-social behaviour both correlate negatively (p < .05) with some year 2 behaviours.
The produced factors include: Factor 1: knowledge and beliefs (10 items), Factor 2: behaviours (6 items), Factor 3: sources of information (7 items), Factor 4: adherence (5 items), Factor 5: awareness about antibiotics resistance (5 items), and Factor 6: parents' perception on doctors' prescribing behaviours (3 items).
Similar(57)
Table 2 Behaviour of the scheduler in dynamic situations.
Open image in new window Fig. 2 Behaviour of business ethics experts in a Delphi method.
They had to indicate how well their peers mastered the criteria on a four-point scale: (1) behaviour not shown, (2) behaviour shown but insufficient, (3) behaviour shown and sufficient, (4) behaviour shown and good.
Hierarchical multiple regression analyses predicting 1) intentions and 2) behaviour were conducted.
Owl performed one behaviour and Goo performed 11 behaviours (grand mean ± s.e.m.: 3.25±2.63).
Antisocial behaviour was defined as any antisocial behaviour on more than one adolescent wave, and/or 2+ behaviours in the same wave.
Within the larger imputation sample, this distribution changed marginally to reflect the inclusion of participants with larger numbers of risks: 0 1 behaviour 22.0%, 2 3 behaviours 40.6%, 4 6 behaviours 29.0% and 7+ behaviours 8.4%.
> -wrap-foot> totalotal number of risk behaviours reported was tallied for each participant and grouped for the complete case sample as follows: 0 1 risk behaviour 25.5%, 2 3 behaviours 41.7%, 4 6 behaviours 26.7% and 7+ behaviours 6.1%.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com