When ab ≠ c - c′: Published errors in the reports of single-mediator models

Behavior Research Methods

Volumn 45, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 595-601

  Petrocelli, John V ^a   Clarkson, Joshua J ^b   Whitmire, Melanie B ^a   Moon, Paul E ^a  

^a WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI   (United States)

Author keywords

Error; Mediation analysis; Validity of research conclusions

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; EPIDEMIOLOGY; METHODOLOGY; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; PUBLISHING; REPRODUCIBILITY; SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY; STANDARD; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL MODEL; STATISTICS;

BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; CAUSALITY; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; MODELS, STATISTICAL; PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL; PUBLISHING; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 84878263940     PISSN: 1554351X     EISSN: 15543528     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/s13428-012-0262-5     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Bakker, M., & Wicherts, J. M. (2011). The (mis)reporting of statistical results in psychology journals. Behavior Research Methods, 43, 666-678.
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.
3. Berle, D., & Starcevic, V. (2007). Inconsistencies between reported test statistics and p-values in two psychiatry journals. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, 16, 202-207.
4. Bodenhausen, G. V., Macrae, C. N., & Sherman, J. W. (1999). On the dialectics of discrimination: Dual processes in social stereotyping. In S. Chaiken & Y. Trope (Eds.), Dual process theories in social psychology (pp. 271-290). New York: Guilford Press.
5. Dawson, E., Gilovich, T., & Regan, D. T. (2002). Motivated reasoning and performance on the Wason Selection Task. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1379-1387.
6. Dovidio, J. F., ten Vergert, M., Stewart, T. L., Gaertner, S. L., Johnson, J. D., Esses, V. M., ...& Pearson, A. R. (2004). Perspective and prejudice: Antecedents and mediating mechanisms. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 1537-1549.
7. Edwards, K., & Smith, E. E. (1996). A disconfirmation bias in the evaluation of arguments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 5-23.
8. Fiske, S. T., Lin, M., & Neuberg, S. L. (1999). The continuum model: Ten years later. In S. Chaiken & Y. Trope (Eds.), Dual process theories in social psychology (pp. 231-254). New York: Guilford Press.
9. Hayes, A. F. (2009). Beyond Baron and Kenny: Statistical mediation analysis in the new millenium. Communication Monographs, 76, 408-420.
10. Hayes, A. F. (2012). PROCESS. [Computer software] Retrieved from http://www. afhayes. com/spss-sas-and-mplus-macros-and-code. html.
11. Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., & Bolger, N. (1998). Data analysis in social psychology. In D. Gilbert, S. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology Vol. 1 (4th ed., pp. 233-265). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
12. Koehler, J. J. (1993). The influence of prior beliefs on scientific judgments of evidence quality. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 56, 28-55.
13. MacKinnon, D. P., & Dwyer, J. H. (1993). Estimation of mediated effects in prevention studies. Evaluation Review, 17, 144-158.
14. MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J., & Fritz, M. S. (2007). Mediation analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 593-614.
15. MacKinnon, D. P., Krull, J. L., & Lockwood, C. M. (2000). Equivalence of the mediation, confounding, and suppression effect. Prevention Science, 1, 173-181.
16. 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.
17. Rosenthal, R. (1978). How often are our numbers wrong? American Psychologist, 33, 1005-1008.
18. Rossi, J. S. (1987). How often are our statistics wrong? A statistics class exercise. Teaching of Psychology, 14, 98-101.
19. Rucker, D. D., Preacher, K. J., Tormala, Z. L., & Petty, R. E. (2011). Mediation analysis in social psychology: Current practices and new recommendations. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 5, 359-371.
20. Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. (2002). Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7, 422-445.
21. Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., & Simonsohn, U. (2011). False-positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant. Psychological Science, 22, 1359-1366.
22. Smith, E. R. (2012). Editorial. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102, 1-3.
23. 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.
24. Wicherts, J. M., Bakker, M., & Molenaar, D. (2011). Willingness to share research data is related to the strength of the evidence and the quality of reporting of statistical results. Public Library of Science ONE, 6, 1-7.
25. Zhao, X., Lynch, J. G., Jr., & Chen, Q. (2010). Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 37, 197-206.