Statistical difficulties of detecting interactions and moderator effects.

McClelland, Gary H.; Judd, Charles H.

doi:10.1037/0033-2909.114.2.376

Cited by 2,769 publications

(2,197 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

2,076

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We hesitate to conclude that status self-effacers are indeed liked more than accurate status perceivers because of the statistical difficulty of testing nonlinear effects (McClelland & Judd, 1993). Tests of curvilinear effects typically have low power, decreasing our chances of detecting such an effect.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Knowing your place: Self-perceptions of status in face-to-face groups.

Anderson

Srivastava

Beer

et al. 2006

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

417

347

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Status is the prominence, respect, and influence individuals enjoy in the eyes of others. Theories of positive illusions suggest that individuals form overly positive perceptions of their status in face-to-face groups. In contrast, the authors argue that individuals' perceptions of their status are highly accuratethat is, they closely match the group's perception of their status-because forming overly positive status self-perceptions can damage individuals' acceptance in a group. Therefore, the authors further argue that individuals are likely to refrain from status self-enhancement to maintain their belongingness in a group. Support for their hypotheses was found in 2 studies of status in face-to-face groups, using a social relations model approach (D. A. Kenny & L. La Voie, 1984). Individuals showed high accuracy in perceiving their status and even erred on the side of being overly humble. Moreover, enhancement in status self-perceptions was associated with lower levels of social acceptance.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Knowing your place: Self-perceptions of status in face-to-face groups.

Anderson

Srivastava

Beer

et al. 2006

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

417

347

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The difference between rmANOVA and rmMRA is that the rmMRA handles continuous independent variables and that a much larger number of observations is needed to overcome statistical power problems due to non-uniformly distributed variables and due to the correlations between the predictors. These problems especially concern statistical tests of interactions (McClelland & Judd, 1993).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tracking the mind during reading: The influence of past, present, and future words on fixation durations.

Kliegl

Nuthmann

Engbert

2006

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

508

679

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reading requires the orchestration of visual, attentional, language-related, and oculomotor processing constraints. This study replicates previous effects of frequency, predictability, and length of fixated words on fixation durations in natural reading and demonstrates new effects of these variables related to previous and next words. Results are based on fixation durations recorded from 222 persons, each reading 144 sentences. Such evidence for distributed processing of words across fixation durations challenges psycholinguistic immediacy-of-processing and eye-mind assumptions. Most of the time the mind processes several words in parallel at different perceptual and cognitive levels. Eye movements can help to unravel these processes.Keywords: eye movements, fixation duration, gaze, word recognition, reading Reading is a fairly recent cultural invention. The perceptual, attentional, and oculomotor processes enabling this remarkable and complex human skill had been in place for a long time before the first sentence was read. Of course, reading also fundamentally presupposes language, reasoning, and memory processes. If we want to understand how internal processes of the mind and external stimuli play together in the generation of complex action, reading may serve as an ideal sample case, because, despite its complexity, it occurs in settings that are very amenable to experimental control. In addition, the measurement of eye movements yields high-resolution time series that have proven to be very sensitive to factors at all levels of the behavioral and cognitive hierarchy. Most importantly, we already know or can determine basic perceptual, attentional, and oculomotor constraints which any theory of reading and any computational model implementing such a theory at a behavioral microlevel must respect.Looking at the eyes, reading proceeds as an alternating sequence of fixations (lasting 150 to 300 ms) and saccades (30 ms). Information uptake is largely restricted to fixations. For example, fixation durations reliably decrease with the printed frequency of words and with their predictability from prior words of the sentence. Beyond these uncontroversial facts, however, much still needs to be learned about perceptual and attentional processes and properties of words that guide the eyes through a sentence. Starr and Rayner (2001, p. 156) highlighted the following three issues as particularly controversial: "(1) the extent to which eye-movement behavior is affected by low-level oculomotor factors versus higher-level cognitive processes; (2) how much information is extracted from the right of fixations; and (3) whether readers process information from more than one word at a time." Distributed Processing in Fixation Durations 4In this article, we report new empirical results relating to each of these issues. We also present a data-analytic framework within which these issues can be addressed simultaneously and propose a set of theoretical principles which account for a complex set of experimental observations....

show abstract

“…This way we were able to address a common limitation of field experiments, where tests for moderations are often underpowered (cf. McClelland & Judd, 1993). That we did not find the interactions reported by Conner in the analyses of the individual studies and meta‐analyses points to the need for caution in the interpretation of SES as a potential moderator of the intention–behaviour gap.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is the intention–behaviour gap greater amongst the more deprived? A meta‐analysis of five studies on physical activity, diet, and medication adherence in smoking cessation

Vasiljevic

Griffin

et al. 2015

British J Health Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesUnhealthy behaviour is more common amongst the deprived, thereby contributing to health inequalities. The evidence that the gap between intention and behaviour is greater amongst the more deprived is limited and inconsistent. We tested this hypothesis using objective and self‐report measures of three behaviours, both individual‐ and area‐level indices of socio‐economic status, and pooling data from five studies.DesignSecondary data analysis.MethodsMultiple linear regressions and meta‐analyses of data on physical activity, diet, and medication adherence in smoking cessation from 2,511 participants.ResultsAcross five studies, we found no evidence for an interaction between deprivation and intention in predicting objective or self‐report measures of behaviour. Using objectively measured behaviour and area‐level deprivation, meta‐analyses suggested that the gap between self‐efficacy and behaviour was greater amongst the more deprived (B = .17 [95% CI = 0.02, 0.31]).ConclusionsWe find no compelling evidence to support the hypothesis that the intention–behaviour gap is greater amongst the more deprived. Statement of contribution What is already known on this subject? Unhealthy behaviour is more common in those who are more deprived.This may reflect a larger gap between intentions and behaviour amongst the more deprived.The limited evidence to date testing this hypothesis is mixed. What does this study add? In the most robust study to date, combining results from five trials, we found no evidence for this explanation.The gap between intentions and behaviour did not vary with deprivation for the following: diet, physical activity, or medication adherence in smoking cessation.We did, however, find a larger gap between perceived control over behaviour (self‐efficacy) and behaviour in those more deprived.These findings add to existing evidence to suggest that higher rates of unhealthier behaviour in more deprived groups may be reduced by the following: Strengthening behavioural control mechanisms (such as executive function and non‐conscious processes) or Behaviour change interventions that bypass behavioural control mechanisms.

show abstract

Statistical difficulties of detecting interactions and moderator effects.

Cited by 2,769 publications

References 40 publications

Knowing your place: Self-perceptions of status in face-to-face groups.

Knowing your place: Self-perceptions of status in face-to-face groups.

Tracking the mind during reading: The influence of past, present, and future words on fixation durations.

Is the intention–behaviour gap greater amongst the more deprived? A meta‐analysis of five studies on physical activity, diet, and medication adherence in smoking cessation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About