| Literature DB >> 23055167 |
John V Petrocelli1, Joshua J Clarkson, Melanie B Whitmire, Paul E Moon.
Abstract
Accurate reports of mediation analyses are critical to the assessment of inferences related to causality, since these inferences are consequential for both the evaluation of previous research (e.g., meta-analyses) and the progression of future research. However, upon reexamination, approximately 15% of published articles in psychology contain at least one incorrect statistical conclusion (Bakker & Wicherts, Behavior research methods, 43, 666-678 2011), disparities that beget the question of inaccuracy in mediation reports. To quantify this question of inaccuracy, articles reporting standard use of single-mediator models in three high-impact journals in personality and social psychology during 2011 were examined. More than 24% of the 156 models coded failed an equivalence test (i.e., ab = c - c'), suggesting that one or more regression coefficients in mediation analyses are frequently misreported. The authors cite common sources of errors, provide recommendations for enhanced accuracy in reports of single-mediator models, and discuss implications for alternative methods.Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23055167 DOI: 10.3758/s13428-012-0262-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Behav Res Methods ISSN: 1554-351X