1979
DOI: 10.1177/014662167900300113
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Use of Structural Equation Models in Interpreting Regression Equations Including Suppressor and Enhancer Variables

Abstract: It is shown that the usual interpretation of "sup pressor" effects in a multiple regression equation assumes that the correlations among variables have been generated by a particular structural (causal) model, namely, Conger's (1974) two-factor model. A distinction is drawn between the technical definition of "suppression," which is more fittingly labelled enhancement, and suppression as the appropriate interpretation of a regression equation exhibiting enhancement when that equation has been gen erated by the… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

2
69
1
2

Year Published

1989
1989
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 89 publications
(77 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
2
69
1
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Perhaps this is what we would expect if the correlation were indirect, fueled by two distinct but related types of mminafion (a situation also known as inconsistent mediation; McFatter, 1979). This might also explain why the correlation is stronger in accomplished artists-they might ruminate more often, more deeply, or more uncontrollably, thus putting them at a higher risk of depression.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…Perhaps this is what we would expect if the correlation were indirect, fueled by two distinct but related types of mminafion (a situation also known as inconsistent mediation; McFatter, 1979). This might also explain why the correlation is stronger in accomplished artists-they might ruminate more often, more deeply, or more uncontrollably, thus putting them at a higher risk of depression.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…When this situation occurs, researchers often find it difficult to explain the results and tend to regard such variables -with suspicion and distrust‖ (Horst, 1941, p. 435). Thus, a strong temptation exists to eliminate these variables and retain a model that is in line with the researcher's theory and hypothesis (Gelman & Hill, 2007;McFatter, 1979). In reality, such results clearly imply the presence of a suppressor variable, and the negative sign is a result of the suppressor's low correlation with the outcome variable and high correlation with other predictor variables at the bivariate level.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…The confirmatory factor analysis is used to test the validity and suitability of the indicators for each construct [21]. The outcome from this procedure is the goodness of fit values for each construct.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%