Factor score regression (FSR) is a popular alternative for structural equation modeling. Naively applying FSR induces bias for the estimators of the regression coefficients. Croon proposed a method to correct for this bias. Next to estimating effects without bias, interest often lies in inference of regression coefficients or in the fit of the model. In this article, we propose fit indices for FSR that can be used to inspect the model fit. We also introduce a model comparison test based on one of these newly proposed fit indices that can be used for inference of the estimators on the regression coefficients. In a simulation study we compare FSR with Croon’s corrections and structural equation modeling in terms of bias of the regression coefficients, Type I error rate and power.

It is well known from the mediation analysis literature that the identification of direct and indirect effects relies on strong no unmeasured confounding assumptions of no unmeasured confounding. Even in randomized studies the mediator may still be correlated with unobserved prognostic variables that affect the outcome, in which case the mediator's role in the causal process may not be inferred without bias. In the behavioural and social science literature very little attention has been given so far to the causal assumptions required for moderated mediation analysis. In this paper we focus on the index for moderated mediation, which measures by how much the mediated effect is larger or smaller for varying levels of the moderator. We show that in linear models this index can be estimated without bias in the presence of unmeasured common causes of the moderator, mediator and outcome under certain conditions. Importantly, one can thus use the test for moderated mediation to support evidence for mediation under less stringent confounding conditions. We illustrate our findings with data from a randomized experiment assessing the impact of being primed with social deception upon observer responses to others' pain, and from an observational study of individuals who ended a romantic relationship assessing the effect of attachment anxiety during the relationship on mental distress 2 years after the break-up.

To assess the direct and indirect effect of an intervention, multilevel 2-1-1 studies with intervention randomized at the upper (class) level and mediator and outcome measured at the lower (student) level are frequently used in educational research. In such studies, the mediation process may flow through the student-level mediator (the within indirect effect) or a class-aggregated mediator (the contextual indirect effect). In this article, we cast mediation analysis within the counterfactual framework and clarify the assumptions that are needed to identify the within and contextual indirect effect. We show that unlike the contextual indirect effect, the within indirect effect can be unbiasedly estimated in linear models in the presence of unmeasured confounders of the mediator–outcome relationship at the upper level that exert additive effects on mediator and outcome. When unmeasured confounding occurs at the individual level, both indirect effects are no longer identified. We propose sensitivity analyses to assess the robustness of the within and contextual indirect effect under lower and upper-level confounding, respectively.

No abstract

No abstract