Table 5 Significant effects of the mediation analyses (Study 2)

General appreciation scale

B = .44, SE = .11, p < .001

Percentage that health insurance should compensate

B = 2.20, SE = .52, p < .001

Allocation of money to Lytgens’ intervention/nursing home

B = -.75, SE = .20, p < .001

Allocation of money to Lytgens’ intervention/alcohol prevention

B = -.56, SE = .22, p = .01

Step 2: Effect of scenario condition on explanatory variables

Urgency to introduce method

B = .48, SE = .15, p = .002

Urgency to develop similar methods

B = .31, SE = .15, p = .04

Certainty of attribution (Professor Lytgens saves lives)

B = .84, SE = .19, p < .001

Certainty of attribution (less mortality)

B = .42, SE = .16, p = .01.

Time interval

B = -.59, SE = .18, p = .002

Step 3: Effect of significant explanatory variables on significant appreciation measures while controlled for scenario condition

General appreciation scale

-Urgency to introduce the method

B = .16, SE = .07, p = .03

-Certainty of less mortality

B = .20, SE = .06, p = .002

Percentage that health insurance should compensate

-Urgency to introduce the method

B = 1.53, SE = .37, p < .001

Allocation of money to Lytgens’ intervention/nursing homes

-Urgency to introduce the method

B = -.34, SE = .15, p = .03

Step 4: Effect of scenario condition on significant appreciation measures while controlling significant explanatory variables

General appreciation scale

B = .16, SE = .10, p = .13

Percentage that health insurance should compensate

B = 1.39, SE = .54, p = .01

Allocation of money to Lytgens’ intervention/ nursing homes

B = 1.39, SE = .54, p = .01