Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, USA.
Behav Res Methods. 2013 Jun;45(2):595-601. doi: 10.3758/s13428-012-0262-5.
Accurate reports of mediation analyses are critical to the assessment of inferences related to causality, since these inferences are consequential for both the evaluation of previous research (e.g., meta-analyses) and the progression of future research. However, upon reexamination, approximately 15% of published articles in psychology contain at least one incorrect statistical conclusion (Bakker & Wicherts, Behavior research methods, 43, 666-678 2011), disparities that beget the question of inaccuracy in mediation reports. To quantify this question of inaccuracy, articles reporting standard use of single-mediator models in three high-impact journals in personality and social psychology during 2011 were examined. More than 24% of the 156 models coded failed an equivalence test (i.e., ab = c - c'), suggesting that one or more regression coefficients in mediation analyses are frequently misreported. The authors cite common sources of errors, provide recommendations for enhanced accuracy in reports of single-mediator models, and discuss implications for alternative methods.
中介分析报告的准确性对于因果关系推断的评估至关重要，因为这些推断对于评估先前的研究（例如荟萃分析）和推进未来的研究都具有重要意义。然而，经过重新审查，心理学领域大约有 15%的已发表文章至少包含一个不正确的统计结论（Bakker 和 Wicherts，《行为研究方法》，43，666-678，2011），这些差异引发了中介报告不准确的问题。为了量化这种不准确的问题，对 2011 年人格和社会心理学领域三本高影响力期刊中报告标准使用单中介模型的文章进行了检查。在编码的 156 个模型中，超过 24%的模型未能通过等效性检验（即 ab = c - c'），这表明在中介分析中，一个或多个回归系数经常被错误报告。作者引用了常见的错误来源，为报告单中介模型的准确性提供了建议，并讨论了替代方法的影响。
