Guidelines for the Investigation of Mediating Variables in Business Research

Journal of Business and Psychology

Volumn 27, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 1-14

  MacKinnon, David P ^a   Coxe, Stefany ^a   Baraldi, Amanda N ^a  

^a ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Causal inference; Confidence intervals; Indirect effects; Longitudinal models; Mediation; Moderation; Significance testing

Indexed keywords

EID: 84857043797     PISSN: 08893268     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10869-011-9248-z     Document Type: Article

References (88)

1. Alwin, D. F., & Hauser, R. M. (1975). The decomposition of effects in path analysis. American Sociological Review, 40, 37-47.
2. Aroian, L. A. (1947). The probability function of the product of two normally distributed variables. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 18, 265-271.
3. Ashby, W. R. (1956). An introduction to cybernetics. New York: Wiley.
4. Bagozzi, R., & Heatherton, T. (1994). A general approach to representing multifaceted personality constructs: Application to state self-esteem. Structural Equation Modeling, 1, 35-67.
5. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
6. Begg, C. B., & Leung, D. H. Y. (2000). On the use of surrogate end points in randomized trials. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society (Series A-Statistics in Society), 163, 15-28.
7. Chen, H. T. (1990). Theory-driven evaluations. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
8. Chen, C. C., & Chiu, S. F. (2008). An integrative model linking supervisor support and organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Business and Psychology, 23, 1-10.
9. Cheong, J. (2002). Investigation of a method to evaluate mediating mechanisms to reduce adolescent DUI in a school-based prevention program (Doctoral Dissertation). Arizona State University; Tempe, AZ.
10. Cheong, J., MacKinnon, D. P., & Khoo, S. T. (2003). Investigation of mediational processes using parallel process latent growth curve modeling. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 10, 238.
11. Chiaburu, D. S., & Byrne, Z. S. (2009). Predicting OCB role definitions: Exchanges with the organization and psychological attachment. Journal of Business and Psychology, 24, 201-214.
12. Coffman, D. L. (2011). Estimating causal effects in mediation analysis using propensity scores. Structural Equation Modeling, 18, 357-369.
13. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
14. Cohen, S., & Wills, T. A. (1985). Stress, social support and the buffering hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin, 98, 310-357.
15. Cole, D. A., & Maxwell, S. E. (2003). Testing mediational models with longitudinal data: Questions and tips in the use of structural equation modeling. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 112, 558-577.
16. Collins, L., Graham, J., & Flaherty, B. (1998). An alternative framework for defining mediation. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 33, 295-312.
17. Conway, J. M., & Lance, C. E. (2010). What reviewers should expect from authors regarding common method bias in organizational research. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25, 325-334.
18. Craig, C. C. (1936). On the frequency function of xy. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 7, 1-15.
19. Fairchild, A. J., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2008). A general model for testing mediation and moderation effects. Prevention Science, 10, 87-99.
20. Frangakis, C. E., & Rubin, D. B. (2002). Principal stratification in causal inference. Biometrics, 58, 21-29.
21. Frank, K. A. (2000). Impact of a confounding variable on a regression coefficient. Sociological Methods & Research, 29, 147-194.
22. Fritz, M. S., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2007). Required sample size to detect the mediated effect. Psychological Science, 18, 233-239.
23. Geiser, C., & Lockhart, G. L. (under review). A comparison of four approaches to account for method effects in latent state-trait models.
24. Gollob, H. F., & Reichardt, C. S. (1991). Interpreting and estimating indirect effects assuming time lags really matter. In L. M. Collins & J. L. Horn (Eds.), Best methods for the analysis of change: Recent advances, unanswered questions, future directions (pp. 243-259). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
25. Greenland, S., & Morgenstern, H. (2001). Confounding in health research. Annual Review of Public Health, 22, 189-212.
26. Hill, A. (1965). The environment and disease: Association or causation? Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine, 58, 295-300.
27. Holland, P. W. (1988). Causal inference, path analysis, and recursive structural equation models. Sociological Methodology, 18, 449-484.
28. Holmbeck, G. N. (1997). Toward terminological, conceptual, and statistical clarity in the study of mediators and moderators: Examples from the child-clinical and pediatric psychology literatures. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 65, 599-610.
29. Hoyle, R. H., & Kenny, D. A. (1999). Sample size, reliability, and tests of statistical mediation. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Statistical strategies for small sample research (pp. 195-222). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
30. Hung, T.-K., Chi, N. W., & Lu, W. L. (2009). Exploring the relationships between perceived coworker loafing and counterproductive work behaviors: The mediating role of a revenge motive. Journal of Business and Psychology, 24, 257-270.
31. Imai, K., Keele, L., & Tingley, D. (2010). A general approach to causal mediation analysis. Psychological Methods, 15, 309-334.
32. James, L. R., & Brett, J. M. (1984). Mediators, moderators, and tests for mediation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 307-321.
33. James, L. R., Mulaik, S. A., & Brett, J. M. (2006). A tale of two methods. Organizational Research Methods, 9, 233-244.
34. Jo, B. (2008). Causal inference in randomized experiments with mediational processes. Psychological Methods, 13, 314-336.
35. Jo, B., Stuart, E. A., MacKinnon, D. P., & Vinokur, A. D. (2011). The use of propensity scores in mediation analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 3, 425-452.
36. Johnson, R. E., Rosen, C. C., & Chang, C. (2011). To aggregate or not to aggregate: Steps for developing and validating higher-order multidimensional constructs. Journal of Business and Psychology, 26, 241-248.
37. Judd, C. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1981). Process analysis. Evaluation Review, 5, 602-619.
38. Klesges, R. C., Vasey, M. M., & Glasgow, R. E. (1986). A worksite smoking modification competition: Potential for public health impact. American Journal of Public Health, 76, 198-200.
39. Kraemer, H. C., Wilson, G. T., Fairburn, C. G., & Agras, W. S. (2002). Mediators and moderators of treatment effects in randomized clinical trials. Archives of General Psychiatry, 59, 877-884.
40. Lazarsfeld, P. F. (1955). Interpretation of statistical relations as a research operation. In P. F. Lazardsfeld & M. Rosenberg (Eds.), The language of social research: A reader in the methodology of social research (pp. 115-125). Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
41. Leach, D. J., Rogelberg, S. G., Warr, P. B., & Burnfield, J. L. (2009). Perceived meeting effectiveness: The role of design characteristics. Journal of Business and Psychology, 24, 65-76.
42. Li, Y., Bienias, J. L., & Bennett, D. A. (2007). Confounding in the estimation of mediation effects. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 51, 3173-3186.
43. Lin, D. Y., Psaty, B. M., & Kronmal, R. A. (1998). Assessing the sensitivity of regression results to unmeasured confounders in observational studies. Biometrics, 54, 948-963.
44. Lipsey, M. W. (1993). Theory as method: Small theories of treatments. In L. B. Sechrest & A. G. Scott (Eds.), Understanding causes and generalizing about them: New directions for program evaluation (pp. 5-38). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
45. Lockhart, G., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2010). Test of an instrumental variable approach to mediation analysis. In D. P. MacKinnon & G. Lockhart (Discussants), New directions in mediating variable analysis.Poster symposium presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society for Prevention Research, Denver, CO.
46. Lockwood, C. M., & MacKinnon, D. P. (1998). Bootstrapping the standard error of the mediated effect. In Proceedings of the twenty-third annual SAS users group international conference (pp. 997-1002), Cary, NC: SAS Institute.
47. Lynch, K. G., Cary, M., Gallop, R., & Ten Have, T. R. (2008). Causal mediation analyses for randomized trials. Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology, 8, 57-76.
48. Mackinnon, D. P. (1994). Analysis of mediating variables in prevention and intervention research. In A. Cazares & L. A. Beatty (Eds.), Scientific methods for prevention/intervention research (NIDA Research Monograph Series 139, DHHS Publication No. 94-3631, pp. 127-153). Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Health and Human Services.
49. MacKinnon, D. P. (2008). Introduction to statistical mediation analysis. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
50. MacKinnon, D. P. (2011). Integrating mediators and moderators in research design. Research on Social Work Practice, 21, 675-681.
51. MacKinnon, D. P., Fritz, M. S., Williams, J., & Lockwood, C. M. (2007). Distribution of the product confidence limits for the indirect effect: Program PRODCLIN. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 384-389.
52. MacKinnon, D. P., Krull, J. L., & Lockwood, C. M. (2000). Equivalence of the mediation, confounding, and suppression effect. Prevention Science, 1, 173-181.
53. MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., Hoffman, J. M., West, S. G., & Sheets, V. (2002). A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects. Psychological Methods, 7, 83-104.
54. MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., & Williams, J. (2004). Confidence limits for the indirect effect: Distribution of the product and resampling methods. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39, 99-128.
55. MacKinnon, D. P., & Pirlott, A. (2011). The unbearable lightness of b: Approaches to improving causal inference in mediation studies (submitted).
56. Maxwell, J. A., Bashook, P. G., & Sandlow, L. J. (1986). Combining ethnographic and experimental methods in educational evaluation: A case study. In D. M. Fetterman & M. A. Pittman (Eds.), Educational evaluation: Ethnography in theory, practice, and politics (pp. 121-143). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
57. Maxwell, S. E., & Cole, D. A. (2007). Bias in cross-sectional analyses of longitudinal mediation. Psychological Methods, 12, 23-44.
58. McDonald, R. P. (1997). Haldane's lungs: A case study in path analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 32, 1-38.
59. Mitchell, T. R., & James, L. R. (2001). Building better theory: Time and the specification of when things happen. Academy of Management Review, 25, 530-547.
60. Murphy, S. A., van der Laan, M. J., & Robins, J. M. (2001). Marginal mean models for dynamic regimes. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 96, 1410-1423.
61. Parker, C. P., Baltes, B. B., Young, S. A., Huff, J. W., Altmann, R. A., Lacost, H. A., et al. (2003). Relationships between psychological climate perceptions and work outcomes: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24, 389-416.
62. Pearl, J. (2009). Graphs, causality, and structural equation models. Sociological Methods & Research, 27, 226-284.
63. Pearl, J. (2010). The foundations of causal inference. Sociological Methodology, 40, 75-149.
64. Pearl, J. (in press). The mediation formula: A guide to the assessment of causal pathways for direct and indirect effects. Prevention Science.
65. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 717-731.
66. Robins, J. M., & Greenland, S. (1992). Identifiabilty and exchangeability for direct and indirect effects. Epidemiology, 3, 143-155.
67. Robins, J. M., Mark, S. D., & Newey, W. K. (1992). Estimating exposure effects by modelling the expectation of exposure conditional on confounders. Biometrics, 48, 479-495.
68. Rosenbaum, P. R. (2002). Covariance adjustment in randomized experiments and observational studies. Statistical Science, 17, 286-327.
69. Rubin, D. B. (2004). Direct and indirect causal effects via potential outcomes. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, 31, 161-170.
70. Shanock, L. R., Baran, B. E., Gentry, W. A., Pattison, S. C., & Heggestad, E. D. (2010). Polynomial regression with response surface analysis: A powerful approach for examining moderation and overcoming limitations of difference scores. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25, 543-554.
71. Shipley, B. (2000). A new inferential test for path models based on directed acyclic graphs. Structural Equation Modeling, 7, 206-218.
72. Sidani, S., & Sechrest, L. (1999). Putting program theory into operation. American Journal of Evaluation, 20, 227-238.
73. Singer, J. D., & Willet, J. B. (2003). Applied longitudinal data analysis: Modeling change and event occurrence. London: Oxford University Press.
74. Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models. Sociological Methodology, 13, 290-312.
75. Sobel, M. E. (1998). Causal inference in statistical models of the process of socioeconomic achievement: A Case study. Sociological Methods and Research, 27, 318-348.
76. Sobel, M. E. (2008). Identification of causal parameters in randomized studies with mediating variables. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 33, 230-251.
77. Spencer, S. J., Zanna, M. P., & Fong, G. T. (2005). Establishing a causal chain: Why experiments are often more effective than mediational analyses in examining psychological processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 845-851.
78. Stone-Romero, E. F., & Rosopa, P. J. (2011). Experimental tests of mediation: Prospects, problems, and some solutions. Organizational Research Methods, 14, 631-646.
79. Tein, J., Sandler, I. N., MacKinnon, D. P., & Wolchik, S. A. (2004). How did it work? Who did it work for? Mediation in the context of a moderated prevention effect for children of divorce. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 72, 617-624.
80. ten Have, T. R. T., Joffe, M. M., Lynch, K. G., Brown, G. K., Maisto, S. A., & Beck, A. T. (2007). Causal mediation analyses with rank preserving models. Biometrics, 63, 926-934.
81. Thoemmes, F., MacKinnon, D. P., & Reiser, M. R. (2010). Power analysis for complex mediational designs using Monte Carlo methods. Structural Equation Modeling, 17, 510-534.
82. Tofighi, D., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2011). RMediation: An R package for mediation analysis confidence intevals. Behavior Research Methods, 43, 692-700.
83. Tonidandel, S., & LeBreton, J. M. (2011). Relative importance analysis: A useful supplement to regression analysis. Journal of Business and Psychology, 26, 1-9.
84. VanderWeele, T. J. (2008). Simple relations between principal stratification and direct and indirect effects. Statistics and Probability Letters, 78, 2957-2962.
85. VanderWeele, T. J. (2010). Bias formulas for sensitivity analysis for direct and indirect effects. Epidemiology, 21, 540-551.
86. Wald, A. (1943). Tests of statistical hypotheses concerning several parameters when the number of observations is large. Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 54, 426-482.
87. Winship, C., & Morgan, S. L. (1999). The estimation of causal effects from observational data. Annual Review of Sociology, 25, 659-706.
88. Woodworth, R. S. (1928). Dynamic psychology. In C. Murchison (Ed.), Psychologies of 1925 (pp. 111-126). Worcester, MA: Clark Universal Academy Press, Inc.