Four applications of permutation methods to testing a single-mediator model

Behavior Research Methods

Volumn 44, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 806-844

  Taylor, Aaron B ^a   MacKinnon, David P ^b  

^a TEXAS A AND M UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Mediation; Permutation test

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPUTER PROGRAM; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; EPIDEMIOLOGY; HUMAN; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; MONTE CARLO METHOD; PSYCHOLOGY; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL MODEL; STATISTICS;

BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); CONFIDENCE INTERVALS; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; HUMANS; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; MODELS, STATISTICAL; MONTE CARLO METHOD; PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SOFTWARE;

EID: 84865652936     PISSN: 1554351X     EISSN: 15543528     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/s13428-011-0181-x     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Anderson, M. J., & Legendre, P. (1999). An empirical comparison of permutation methods for tests of partial regression coefficients in a linear model. Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation, 62, 271-303.
2. 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. doi: 10. 1037/0022-3514. 51. 6. 1173.
3. Biesanz, J. C., Falk, C. F., & Savalei, V. (2010). Assessing mediational models: Testing and interval estimation for indirect effects. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 45, 661-701. doi: 10. 1080/00273171. 2010. 498292.
4. Cheung, M. W. L. (2007). Comparison of approaches to constructing confidence intervals for mediating effects using structural equation models. Structural Equation Modeling, 14, 227-246.
5. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
6. Cohen, J. (1994). The earth is round (p < . 05). American Psychologist, 49, 997-1003. doi: 10. 1037/0003-066X. 49. 12. 997.
7. Edgington, E. S. (1969). Approximate randomization tests. Journal of Psychology, 72, 143-149.
8. Edgington, E. S. (1995). Randomization tests. New York, NY: Marcel Dekker.
9. Efron, B., & Tibshirani, R. J. (1993). An introduction to the bootstrap. New York, NY: Chapman & Hall.
10. Fisher, R. A. (1935). The design of experiments. New York, NY: Hafner.
11. Freedman, L. S., & Schatzkin, A. (1992). Sample size for studying intermediate endpoints within intervention trials of observational studies. American Journal of Epidemiology, 136, 1148-1159.
12. Fritz, M. S., Taylor, A. B., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2011). Examination of two anomalous results in statistical mediation analysis. Manuscript submitted for publication.
13. James, L. R., & Brett, J. M. (1984). Mediators, moderators, and tests for mediation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 307-321.
14. Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., & Bolger, N. (1998). Data analysis in social psychology. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (pp. 233-265). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.
15. MacKinnon, D. P. (2008). Introduction to statistical mediation analysis. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
16. MacKinnon, D. P., & Dwyer, J. H. (1993). Estimating mediated effects in prevention studies. Evaluation Review, 17, 144-158.
17. 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. doi: 10. 3758/BF03193007.
18. 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. doi: 10. 1037/1082-989X. 7. 1. 83.
19. 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. doi: 10. 1207/s15327906mbr3901_4.
20. Manly, B. F. (1997). Randomization and Monte Carlo methods in biology (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Chapman & Hall.
21. 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. doi: 10. 3758/BF03206553.
22. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879-891. doi: 10. 3758/BRM. 40. 3. 879.
23. SAS Inc. (2007). SAS (Version 9. 2) [Computer software]. Cary, NC: Author.
24. Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. (2002). Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7, 422-445.
25. Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models. Sociological Methodology, 13, 290-312.
26. Taylor, A. B., MacKinnon, D. P., & Tein, J.-Y. (2008). Tests of the three-path mediated effect. Organizational Research Methods, 11, 241-269.
27. ter Braak, C. J. F. (1992). Permutation versus bootstrap significance tests in multiple regression and ANOVA. In K.-H. Jockel, G. Rothe, & W. Sendler (Eds.), Bootstrapping and related techniques (pp. 79-86). Berlin: Springer.
28. Wilkinson, L., & the Task Force on Statistical Inference. (1999). Statistical methods in psychology journals: Guidelines and explanations. American Psychologist, 54, 594-604. doi: 10. 1037/0003-066X. 54. 8. 594.
29. Williams, J., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2008). Resampling and distribution of the product methods for testing indirect effects in complex models. Structural Equation Modeling, 15, 23-51.