Moderated Mediation Analysis Using Bayesian Methods

Abstract

Conventionally, moderated mediation analysis is conducted through adding relevant interaction terms into a mediation model of interest. In this study, we illustrate how to conduct moderated mediation analysis by directly modeling the relation between the indirect effect components including a and b and the moderators, to permit easier specification and interpretation of moderated mediation. With this idea, we introduce a general moderated mediation model that can be used to model many different moderated mediation scenarios including the scenarios described in Preacher, Rucker, and Hayes (2007). Then we discuss how to estimate and test the conditional indirect effects and to test whether a mediation effect is moderated using Bayesian approaches. How to implement the estimation in both BUGS and Mplus is also discussed. Performance of Bayesian methods is evaluated and compared to that of frequentist methods including maximum likelihood (ML) with 1st-order and 2nd-order delta method standard errors and mL with bootstrap (percentile or bias-corrected confidence intervals) via a simulation study. The results show that Bayesian methods with diffuse (vague) priors implemented in both BUGS and Mplus yielded unbiased estimates, higher power than the ML methods with delta method standard errors, and the ML method with bootstrap percentile confidence intervals, and comparable power to the ML method with bootstrap bias-corrected confidence intervals. We also illustrate the application of these methods with the real data example used in Preacher et al. (2007). Advantages and limitations of applying Bayesian methods to moderated mediation analysis are also discussed.