명상도서관
The Relative Trustworthiness of Inferential Tests of the Indirect Effect in Statistical Meditation Analysis: Does Method Really Matter?
자세히보기
- 자료유형학술지논문
- 저자명Hayes, A.F.,Scharkow, M.
- 학회/출판사/기관명SAGE Publications
- 출판년도2013
- 언어영어
- 학술지명/학위논문주기Psychological science
- 발행사항Vol.24No.10[2013]_x000D_
- ISBN/ISSN
- 소개/요약A content analysis of 2 years of Psychological Science articles reveals inconsistencies in how researchers make inferences about indirect effects when conducting a statistical mediation analysis. In this study, we examined the frequency with which popularly used tests disagree, whether the method an investigator uses makes a difference in the conclusion he or she will reach, and whether there is a most trustworthy test that can be recommended to balance practical and performance considerations. We found that tests agree much more frequently than they disagree, but disagreements are more common when an indirect effect exists than when it does not. We recommend the bias-corrected bootstrap confidence interval as the most trustworthy test if power is of utmost concern, although it can be slightly liberal in some circumstances. Investigators concerned about Type I errors should choose the Monte Carlo confidence interval or the distribution-of-the-product approach, which rarely disagree. The percentile bootstrap confidence interval is a good compromise test.
TOP
사전신청
오시는길
명상챗봇
