Have you tried posting your question to Preacher’s facebook page?
https://www.facebook.com/groups/moderation.analysis/
From: SPSSX(r) Discussion [mailto:[hidden email]]
On Behalf Of Poes, Matthew Joseph
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2012 4:54 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: Resources to interpret Preacher and Hayes (2004) SPSS Macro for Simple Mediation?
See my response below.
Matthew J Poes
Research Data Specialist
Center for Prevention Research and Development
University of Illinois
510 Devonshire Dr.
Champaign, IL 61820
Phone: 217-265-4576
email:
[hidden email]
From: SPSSX(r) Discussion [mailto:[hidden email]]
On Behalf Of New 2it
Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2012 5:09 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Resources to interpret Preacher and Hayes (2004) SPSS Macro for Simple Mediation?
SPSSX List friends-
Have used the wisdom here for sometime, but am having a tough time interpreting the following output from Hayes great add-on to SPSS:
VARIABLES IN SIMPLE MEDIATION MODEL
Y Com_Eval
X SDO
M ESJ
DESCRIPTIVES STATISTICS AND PEARSON CORRELATIONS
Mean SD Com_Eval SDO ESJ
Com_Eval 2.3000 .9232 1.0000 .3830 .4363
SDO 3.2126 .5155 .3830 1.0000 .4069
ESJ 3.1935 .4679 .4363 .4069 1.0000
SAMPLE SIZE
166
DIRECT AND TOTAL EFFECTS
Coeff s.e. t Sig(two)
b(YX) .6858 .1292 5.3092 .0000 *This is the effect of your predictor X on Y, so it’s the beta coefficient. For a 1 point increase in X, Y increases by .6858, and this is significant.
b(MX) .3693 .0647 5.7050 .0000 *This is the effect of your mediator on your predictor. Remember that you want to establish the relationship between the mediator and both the IV and DV.
b(YM.X) .6631 .1474 4.4983 .0000 *This is the direct effect of your mediator on the DV, controlling for the effect of your DV.
b(YX.M) .4409 .1338 3.2957 .0012 *The is the direct effect of your IV on your DV, controlling for your mediator.
INDIRECT EFFECT AND SIGNIFICANCE USING NORMAL DISTRIBUTION
Value s.e. LL95CI UL95CI Z Sig(two)
Effect .2449 .0700 .1077 .3821 3.4993 .0005 *This is thus the total indirect effect of your IV on your DV, through your mediator. This is equal to the last coefficient from above subtracted
from the first coefficient above. This gives you the significance, so again, you can say that the indirect effect is significant.
To me, this suggests a significant mediation by between SDO by ESJ to Com_Eval. Am I getting this right? Please confirm and feel free to illuminate! Or if a simple guide to interpretation for this program is available-steer me in the right
direction! The interpretation guide would be the article they wrote. Please note you are using an older mediation approach, and I would suggest using his bootstrap approach, as the assumption of a normal mediated distribution
is not likely true. Otherwise, yes, you are interpreting this correctly. The There is a mediated relationship of SDO on Com_Eval through your mediator of ESJ.
Gracias-
Jaby
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |