To SPB or not to SPB? A mixed methods analysis of self-protective behaviours to prevent repeat victimisation from cyber abuse

Table 3 Logistic regression with Bayesian variable selection explaining the adoption of SPBs following cyber abuse victimisation accounting for the method of abuse experienced by the victim (\(N = 746\)). Check marks denote coefficients included in the models

Coefficient	\(\beta\)	SD	2.5%	97.5%	Pr(\(\beta\) \(\ne\) 0)	Model^a
Coefficient	\(\beta\)	SD	HPD^b	HPD^b	%^c	1	2	3	4	5
Constant	− 2.85	0.45	− 3.77	− 1.98	100	\(\checkmark\)	\(\checkmark\)	\(\checkmark\)	\(\checkmark\)	\(\checkmark\)
Method 5	1.11	0.21	0.69	1.52	100	\(\checkmark\)	\(\checkmark\)	\(\checkmark\)	\(\checkmark\)	\(\checkmark\)
Impact	1.57	0.18	1.21	1.92	100	\(\checkmark\)	\(\checkmark\)	\(\checkmark\)	\(\checkmark\)	\(\checkmark\)
OVR	− 0.81	0.23	− 1.24	− 0.38	99	\(\checkmark\)	\(\checkmark\)	\(\checkmark\)	\(\checkmark\)
Age	0.03	0.01	0.01	0.05	94	\(\checkmark\)	\(\checkmark\)	\(\checkmark\)	\(\checkmark\)	\(\checkmark\)
Method 4	0.18	0.27	0.00	0.77	39		\(\checkmark\)		\(\checkmark\)
Gender	0.09	0.17	0.00	0.51	29			\(\checkmark\)	\(\checkmark\)
Method 1	0.04	0.12	0.00	0.39	17					\(\checkmark\)
Method 3	− 0.02	0.09	− 0.30	0.04	12
Employment	0.01	0.08	− 0.04	0.21	9
Method 2	− 0.01	0.07	− 0.22	0.00	9
Race	− 0.01	0.06	− 0.18	0.02	8
Posterior Probability of the model (%)						24.3	13.2	9.1	6.7	4.9

ISSN: 2193-7680