Notice: On April 23, 2014, Statalist moved from an email list to a forum, based at statalist.org.
From | "Dirk Deichmann" <dirk@dirkdeichmann.de> |
To | statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |
Subject | Re: st: Testing a curvilinear mediator |
Date | Mon, 21 Mar 2011 10:23:10 +0100 (MET) |
Hey everyone, Does anyone know how to handle and interpret an inverted u-shaped mediator in a logistic regression? Or do you maybe have some literature tips? Many thanks again, Dirk ----- original message -------- Subject: st: Testing a curvilinear mediator Sent: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 From: Dirk Deichmann<dirk@dirkdeichmann.de> > Hi group, > > I would like to test a model with a mediating variable which by itself has a > curvilinear relationship with the DV. IV and DV are binary variables whereas > M is continuous. > > If such an analysis of a mediator, which is curvilinear, is possible, how > can I perform it? Are there some causal steps I need to go through? > > I thought that maybe a moderated mediation would work except that the > moderator is not a different variable but the same as the mediator. > > I started with the four step procedure and added the squared term in step 3 > next to the linear term, and the IV (see steps and findings below). However, > I have read that for moderated mediation it is advised to also include an > interaction of the moderator with the IV in the first step already. But this > seems not really applicable in my case, or did I misunderstood something? > > Provided that I am doing something reasonable here, how do I actually > interpret a curvilinear mediator? Is it correct to say that the mediator > works best at intermediate levels and less at low and high levels if I find > an inverted U-shaped relation? Also, how should I perform the Sobel test? > Does this make sense at all if my mediator turns out to be inverted > U-shaped? > > Path b (s.e.) sig. > Step 1: IV > DV 0.63 (0.36) ^ > Step 2: IV > M 0.25 (0.14) ^ > Step 3: M > DV (controlling for IV and M squared) 1.84 (0.38) *** > Step 3: M squared > DV (controlling for IV and M) -0.50 (0.15) *** > Step 4: IV > DV (controlling for M and M squared) 0.44 (0.38) n.s. > > Lot?s of questions- I hope that somebody knows something about this and > would like to thank you in advance for your kind help and support. > > Best, > > Dirk > > > * > * For searches and help try: > * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search > * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq > * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/ > --- original message end ---- * * For searches and help try: * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/