Table 1 Summary statistics of background characteristics.

From: The impact of housework participation on prosocial behavior development among junior high school students in China

Variables, mean (SD)

(1) Full sample

(2) Housework participation = 1

(3) Housework participation = 0

(4) T-test Difference (2)-(3)

P-value

Dependent variables

 Prosocial behavior total scores

8.399

8.493

7.791

0.703***

[2.283]

[2.222]

[2.562]

 

 Helping elders

2.142

2.195

1.798

0.396***

[1.073]

[1.058]

[1.108]

 

 Following orders and lining up

3.061

3.084

2.909

0.175***

[0.970]

[0.956]

[1.114]

 

 Being nice and honest

3.197

3.214

3.083

0.131***

[0.868]

[0.845]

[1.006]

 

Students characteristics

 Age (Years)

12.913

12.898

13.012

−0.114***

[0.846]

[0.838]

[0.890]

 

 Male 1 = yes 0 = no

0.518

0.507

0.590

−0.083***

[0.499]

[0.500]

[0.492]

 

 Boarding at school 1 = yes 0 = no

0.309

0.303

0.348

−0.045***

[0.462]

[0.460]

[0.476]

 

 Only child 1 = yes 0 = no

0.448

0.443

0.486

−0.044***

[0.497]

[0.497]

[0.500]

 

 Left-behind students 1 = yes 0 = no

0.232

0.229

0.247

−0.018

[0.422]

[0.421]

[0.432]

 

Family characteristics

 Father has high school education or above 1 = yes 0 = no

0.368

0.366

0.386

−0.020

[0.482]

[0.482]

[0.487]

 

 Mother has high school education or above 1 = yes 0 = no

0.303

0.302

0.311

−0.009

[0.459]

[0.459]

[0.463]

 

 Family economic status was at the lowest level 1 = yes 0 = no

0.209

0.216

0.171

0.045***

[0.407]

[0.411]

[0.377]

 

 Rural students 1 = yes 0 = no

0.527

0.535

0.478

0.057***

[0.499]

[0.499]

[0.500]

 

Observations

8678

7522

1156

 
  1. The value displayed for t-tests are the differences in the means across the groups.
  2. ***, **, and * indicate significance at the 1, 5, and 10% critical level.
Back to article page