Seeking to explain the processes by which one construct causes another is a staple of psychological research. This is typically done with statistical procedures using observations of the hypothesized cause, mediator, and effect. Unfortunately, interpretations of mediation are generally weak on internal validity when using this approach. As an alternative, a causal chain approach has been advocated, but that approach is often impractical. In this article, a third method that involves measuring or manipulating a moderator is described. The core of the argument for a moderation approach hinges on the recognition that mediation refers to a mechanism or process that might be blocked or enhanced via a moderator. Thus, finding interactions with manipulations, variables, or constructs that might affect the efficiency, rate, or operation of a mechanism, or the links to or from the mechanism, implies that mechanism is involved in determining the relationship between a cause and an effect. Examples and implications regarding the potential use as well as the advantages and disadvantages of the approach for applied researchers are described.
AdamH.ShirakoA. (2013). Not all anger is created equal: The impact of the expresser’s culture on the social effects of anger in negotiations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98, 785–798.
2.
AguinisH.BeatyJ. C.BoikR. J.PierceC. A. (2005). Effect size and power in assessing moderating effects of categorical variables using multiple regression: A 30-year review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 94–107.
3.
BanduraA. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
4.
BanduraA. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: W. H. Freeman & Co, Publishers.
5.
BanduraA.WoodR. E. (1989). Effect of perceived controllability and performance standards on self-regulation of complex decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 805–814.
6.
BaronR. M.KennyD. 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.
7.
BobkoP. (1986). A solution to some dilemmas when testing hypotheses about ordinal interactions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 323–326.
8.
CherringtonD. J.ReitzH. J.ScottW. E. (1971). Effects of contingent and noncontingent reward on the relationship between satisfaction and task performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 55, 531–536.
9.
ColeD. A.MaxwellS. E. (2003). Testing mediational models with longitudinal data: Questions and tips in the use of structural equation modeling. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 112, 558–577.
10.
ColquittJ. A.LePineJ. A.NoeR. A. (2000). Toward an integrative theory of training motivation: A meta-analytic path analysis of 20 years of research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 678–707.
11.
DavidsonO. B.EdenD. (2000). Remedial self-fulfilling prophecy: Two field experiments to prevent Golem effects among disadvantaged women. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 386–398.
12.
DawsonJ. F. (2014). Moderation in management research: What, why, when, and how. Journal of Business and Psychology, 29, 1–19.
13.
DeShonR. P. (2012). Multivariate dynamics in organizational science. In KozlowskiS. W. J. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of industrial and organizational psychology. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
14.
EdenD.ZukY. (1995). Seasickness as a self-fulfilling prophecy: Raising self-efficacy to boost performance at sea. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 628–635.
15.
EdwardsJ. R. (2010). Reconsidering theoretical progress in organizational and management research. Organizational Research Methods, 13, 615–619.
16.
EdwardsJ. R.BerryJ. W. (2010). The presence of something or the absence of nothing: Increasing theoretical precision in management research. Organizational Research Methods, 13
(4), 668–689.
17.
EdwardsJ. R.LambertL. S. (2007). Methods for integration moderation and mediation: A general analytical framework using moderated path analysis. Psychological Methods, 12, 1–22.
18.
FreedmanD. A. (2004). Graphical models for causation, and the identification problem. Evaluation Review, 28, 267–293.
19.
GriffethR. W.HomP. W.GaertnerS. (2000). A meta-analysis of antecedents and correlates of employee turnover: Update, moderator tests, and research implications for the next millennium. Journal of Management, 26, 463–488.
20.
HeggestadE. D.KanferR. (2005). The predictive validity of self-efficacy in training performance: Little more than past performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 11, 84–97.
21.
HolmbeckG. N. (1997). Toward terminological, conceptual, and statistical clarity in the study of mediators and moderators: Examples from the child-clinical and pediatric psychology literatures. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 65, 599–610.
22.
HoughL. M.SchneiderR. J. (1996). Personality traits, taxonomies, and applications in organizations. In MurphyK. R. (Ed.), Individual differences and behavior in organizations (pp. 31–88). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
23.
JamesL. R. (2008). On the path to mediation. Organizational Research Methods, 11, 359–363.
24.
JamesL. R.BrettJ. M. (1984). Mediators, moderators and tests of mediation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 307–321.
25.
JamesL. R.MulaikS. A.BrettJ. M. (1982). Causal analysis: Assumptions, models, and data. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
26.
JudgeT. A.RodellJ. B.KlingerR. L.SimonL. S.CrawfordE. R. (2013). Hierarchal representations of the five-factor model of personality in predicting job performance: Integrating three organizing frameworks with two theoretical perspectives. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98, 875–925.
27.
KanferR.AckermanP. L. (1989). Motivation and cognitive abilities: An integration of developmental, differential, and cognitive perspectives. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 657–690.
28.
KennyD. A. (2008). Reflections on mediation. Organizational Research Methods, 11, 353–358.
29.
KlugerA. N.DeNisiA. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 254–284.
30.
KraemerH. C.WilsonT. G.FairburnC. G.AgrasW. S. (2002). Mediators and moderators of treatment effects in randomized clinical trials. Archives of General Psychiatry, 59, 877–883.
31.
LauR.CheungG. W. (2012). Estimating and comparing specific mediation effects in complex latent variable models. Organizational Research Methods, 15, 3–16.
32.
LeavittK.MitchellT. R.PetersonJ. (2010). Theory pruning: Strategies to reduce our dense theoretical landscape. Organizational Research Methods, 13
(4), 644–667.
33.
LewinK. (1954). Behavior and development as a function of the total situation. In CarmichaelL. (Ed.), Manual of child psychology (pp. 918–970). New York, NY: Wiley.
34.
LindseyD. H.BrassD. J.ThomasJ. B. (1995). Efficacy-performance spirals: A multilevel perspective. Academy of Management Review, 20, 645–678.
35.
LockeE. A. (1982). Relation of goal level to performance with a short work period and multiple goal levels. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 512–514.
36.
LockeE. A. (2007). The case for inductive theory building. Journal of Management, 33, 867–890.
37.
MacCorquodaleK.MeehlP. E. (1948). On a distinction between hypothetical constructs and intervening variables. Psychological Review, 55, 95–107.
38.
MacKinnonD. P.FairchildA. J. (2009). Current directions in mediation analysis. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18, 16–20.
39.
MacKinnonD. P.FairchildA. J.FritzM. S. (2007). Mediation analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 593–614.
40.
MacKinnonD. P.KrullJ. L.LockwoodC. M. (2000). Equivalence of the mediation, confounding and suppression effect. Prevention Science, 1, 173–181.
41.
MacKinnonD. P.LockwoodC. M.HoffmanJ. M.WestS. G.SheetsV. (2002). A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects. Psychological Methods, 7, 83–104.
42.
MathieuJ. E.DeShonR. P.BerghD. D. (Eds.) (2008). Mediational inferences in organizational research: Then, now and beyond [Special section]. Organizational Research Methods, 11, 203–223.
43.
MathieuJ. E.TaylorS. R. (2006). Clarifying conditions and decision points for mediational type inferences in organizational behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27, 1031–1056.
44.
MaxwellS. E.ColeD. A. (2007). Bias in cross-sectional analyses of longitudinal mediation. Psychological Methods, 12, 23–44.
45.
MorganS. L.WinshipC. (2007). Counterfactuals and causal inference: Methods and principles for social research. Boston, MA: Cambridge University Press.
46.
MullerD.JuddC. M.YzerbytV. Y. (2005). When moderation is mediated and mediation is moderated. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 852–863.
47.
OrneM. T. (1962). On the social psychology of the psychological experiment: With particular reference to demand characteristics and the implications. American Psychologist, 17, 776–783.
48.
PashlerH. (1994). Dual-task interference in simple tasks: Data and theory. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 220–244.
RubinD. B. (2004). Teaching statistical inference for causal effects in experiments and observational studies. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 29, 343–367.
51.
RunkelP. J.McGrathJ. E. (1972). Research on human behavior: A systematic guide to method. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
52.
ShadishW. R.CookT. D.CampbellD. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimentation designs for generalized causal inference. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
53.
ShaverJ. M. (2005). Testing for mediating variables in management research: Concerns, implications, and alternative strategies. Journal of Management, 31, 330–353.
54.
ShiehG. (2009). Detecting interaction effects in moderated multiple regression with continuous variables: Power and sample size considerations. Organizational Research Methods, 12, 510–528.
55.
SitzmannT.YeoG. (2013). A meta-analytic investigation of the within-person self-efficacy domain: Is self-efficacy a product of past performance or a driver of future performance?Personnel Psychology, 66, 531–568.
56.
SpencerS. J.ZannaM. P.FongG. 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.
57.
SteeleC. M.LiuT. J. (1983). Dissonance processes as self-affirmation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 5–19.
58.
Stone-RomeroE. F.AndersonL. E. (1994). Relative power of moderated multiple regression and the comparison of subgroup correlation coefficients for detecting moderating effects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 354–359.
59.
Stone-RomeroE. F.RosopaP. J. (2004). Inference problems with hierarchical multiple regression-based tests of mediating effects. Research in Personnel and Human Resource Management, 23, 249–290.
60.
Stone-RomeroE. F.RosopaP. J. (2008). The relative validity of inferences about mediation as a function of research design characteristics. Organizational Research Methods, 11, 326–352.
61.
Stone-RomeroE. F.RosopaP. J. (2010). Research design options for testing mediation models and their implications for facets of validity. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 25, 697–712.
62.
Stone-RomeroE. F.RosopaP. J. (2011). Experimental tests of mediation: Prospects, problems, and some solutions. Organizational Research Methods, 14, 631–646.
63.
StrubeM. J.BobkoP. (1989). Testing hypotheses about ordinal interactions: Simulations and further comments. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 247–252.
64.
TaylorA. B.MacKinnonD. P.TeinJ. (2008). Tests of the three-path mediated effect. Organizational Research Methods, 11, 241–269.
65.
VancouverJ. B. (2005). The depth of history and explanation as benefit and bane for psychological control theories. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 38–52.
66.
VancouverJ. B.TamaniniK. B.YoderR. J. (2010). Using dynamic computational models to reconnect theory and research: Socialization by the proactive newcomer example. Journal of Management, 36, 764–793.
67.
VancouverJ. B.TischnerE. C. (2004). The effect of feedback sign on task performance depends on self-concept discrepancies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 1092–1098.
68.
VancouverJ. B.WeinhardtJ. M. (2012). Modeling the mind and the milieu: Computational modeling for micro-level organizational researchers. Organizational Research Methods, 15, 602–623.
69.
WasonP. C. (1968). Reasoning about a rule. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 20, 273–281.
70.
WeinhardtJ. M.VancouverJ. B. (2012). Intelligent interventions. Perspectives in Industrial-Organizational Psychology, 5, 179–182.
71.
WoodR. E.GoodmanJ. S.BeckmannN.CookA. (2008). Mediation testing in management research: A review and proposals. Organizational Research Methods, 11, 270–295.
72.
YerkesR. M.DodsonJ. D. (1908). The relation of strength of stimulus to rapidity of habit-formation. Journal of Comparative Neurology and Psychology, 18, 459–482.
