Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 2,742

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

USING THE CORRECT STATISTICAL TEST FOR THE EQUALITY OF REGRESSION COEFFICIENTS

PATERNOSTER, RAYMOND, BRAME, ROBERT, MAZEROLLE, PAUL, PIQUERO, ALEX·1998·Criminology
DOI 10.1111/j.1745-9125.1998.tb01268.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Criminologists are often interested in examining interactive effects within a regression context. For example, “holding other relevant factors constant, is the effect of delinquent peers on one's own delinquent conduct the same for males and females?” or “is the effect of a given treatment program comparable between first‐time and repeat offenders?” A frequent strategy in examining such interactive effects is to test for the difference between two regression coefficients across independent samples. That is, does b 1 = b 2 ? Traditionally, criminologists have employed a t or z test for the difference between slopes in making these coefficient comparisons. While there is considerable consensus as to the appropriateness of this strategy, there has been some confusion in the criminological literature as to the correct estimator of the standard error of the difference, the standard deviation of the sampling distribution of coefficient differences, in the t or z formula. Criminologists have employed two different estimators of this standard deviation in their empirical work. In this note, we point out that one of these estimators is correct while the other is incorrect. The incorrect estimator biases one's hypothesis test in favor of rejecting the null hypothesis that b 1 = b 2 . Unfortunately, the use of this incorrect estimator of the standard error of the difference has been fairly widespread in criminology. We provide the formula for the correct statistical test and illustrate with two examples from the literature how the biased estimator can lead to incorrect conclusions.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1745-9125.1998.tb01268.x

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 10 references

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. 10.1111/j.1745-9125.1989.tb01034.x · doi:10.1111/j.1745-9125.1989.tb01034.x
  2. 10.1111/j.1745-9125.1986.tb01504.x · doi:10.1111/j.1745-9125.1986.tb01504.x
  3. 10.1007/BF02221123 · doi:10.1007/bf02221123
  4. 10.2307/2683621 · doi:10.2307/2683621

Cited by

See all 2,742

Metadata

Authors
PATERNOSTER, R., BRAME, R., MAZEROLLE, P., & PIQUERO, A.
Venue
Criminology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1998-11
Volume
36
Issue
4
Pages
859-866
ISSN
  • 0011-1384 (ISSN-L)
  • 1745-9125
DOI
10.1111/j.1745-9125.1998.tb01268.x
OpenAlex
W2108038333
Cited by
2,742
References
10
FWCI
10.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor, 2683 d)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: USING THE CORRECT STATISTICAL TEST FOR THE EQUALITY OF REGRESSION COEFFICIENTS. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1745-9125.1998.tb01268.x
The paper
PATERNOSTER, R., BRAME, R., MAZEROLLE, P., & PIQUERO, A. (1998). USING THE CORRECT STATISTICAL TEST FOR THE EQUALITY OF REGRESSION COEFFICIENTS. Criminology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.1998.tb01268.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.