the relationship between personality predictors and social media

I am doing a project and i have the data and answers, but I dont get how come they are those answers. It is in PDF on page 5 bottom and there is a table: table 3 (Focus on Model 2 only and only on extraversion, emotional stability and openness).

(Sorry the link doesnt work. Go to scholar.google.com and type "who interacts on the web". The first link, you click on the PDF on the right side, not the first link)

I dont get the results(Which is in red).

"Regarding the first research question, which examined whether the relationship between personality predictors and social media use differ by gender, the results revealed several differences. This is consistent with previous suggestions made by other studies. For men, extraversion was positively related to social media use, b=.10, p=.05 while emotionally stability turned out to be negatively related to the usage of these online social applications, b= -.16, p= .003 (see Table 3). Openness to experience was not statistically significant, b=-.03, p= .56. The more extraverted and anxious males are more likely to engage in socially interactive applications of the Web. For this group, the personality traits explained 3.4% of the variance in social media use, F(8, 314) = 15.59, p< .001, and emotional stability yielded the largest standardized coefficient of the personality traits. Similar to the total sample, males’ life satisfaction disappeared as a predictor when the personality traits were included in the analysis, b= -.04, p= .50. For women, extraversion and openness to experience were positively related to social media use. In contrast to men, emotional stability was unrelated to social media use, b= -.05, p= .24 (see Table 3). Women with higher levels of extraversion and openness tend to use social media more frequently. Both extraversion and openness had similar standardized coefficients, b= .14, p= .001; b= .12, p= .003, respectively. In this group, the personality traits explained 4.3% of the variance in social media use, F(8, 642) = 10.93, p< .001. In contrast to what happened in the males’ group, life satisfaction never played a role in social media use for this sample of females"

I am new to statistics and completely lost on how emotional stability is unrelated to social media for men. I dont see how beta is the answer when s.e. isnt there and also how come the p-value isnt used as the answer because I see a p-value above the significance level.

The link was broken. I put in a way to get it)

When you say related, then that's a code word for "correlation". So what statistical formulas deal with that? For instance, social media use is positively correlated with emotional stability among women. However, it is not the case with men.

Jason76 said:

When you say related, then that's a code word for "correlation". So what statistical formulas deal with that? For instance, social media use is positively correlated with emotional stability among women. However, it is not the case with men.

Click to expand...

Ok thank you. But the problem is how could you tell it is the answer? I mean I am trying to figure out why they are the answer? How do you find out by using beta and p value and find out the standard deviation)

Here is one way to look at correlation, but might not be applicable in this situation:

In order to find out if a relationship exists, make a \(\displaystyle x. y, xy,x^{2}, y^{2}\) table, find r using the formula, then find the correlation t score to find \(\displaystyle t_{c}\) .

Anyhow, you want to find \(\displaystyle t_{c}\) If \(\displaystyle t_{c}\) is \(\displaystyle \geq\) or \(\displaystyle \leq\) than t, then you can conclude that a relationship exists between variables (alternative hypothesis), otherwise you have to accept that no relationship exists (null hypothesis).