9. Hayes Process Macro SPSS - Model 7 - Moderated Mediation Analysis

[@Judy-vs5rj]

I'm very confused analyze in this model. But your kindly explain is very helpful for me. Thank you for your nice video.

[@researchwithfawad]

Glad it was helpful!

[@jayanthkg2664]

Very clear Explanation professor & very much useful. Thank you

[@researchwithfawad]

Pleasure. I am glad you liked it.

[@lazregchaima727]

Dr Fawad you are the best wallah ❤

[@researchwithfawad]

Alhamdullilah. Thanks for watching.

[@munamasri2275]

Very helpful ! God bless you !

[@researchwithfawad]

Glad it was helpful!

[@cailawrance8369]

What a nice tutorial! Thank you!

[@researchwithfawad]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@dr.gowrikannan]

Am watching all the videos....what a wonderful presentation. Thank you sir

[@researchwithfawad]

Thanks. I am glad you liked it. Please do share in your research circle.

[@haseebqureshi8017]

Very well explained sir, thanks for sharing your knowledge ❤.

[@researchwithfawad]

Thanks and welcome

[@haseebqureshi8017]

@@researchwithfawad I am truly grateful for your exceptional ability to share your knowledge in such a clear and respectful manner. Your expertise and considerate approach have made the learning experience enjoyable and enlightening for my Ph.D. journey with confidence and success. Thank you for being an inspiring mentor and a true beacon of knowledge.

[@researchwithfawad]

Thanks for watching. Do share in your research circle.

[@Alhamzah_F_Abbas]

Insightful content.

[@researchwithfawad]

Thanks. I am glad you liked it.

[@putrafaj]

Thank you for the explanation, professor. I have a question, can we do the moderated mediation analysis by using PROCESS in SPSS for panel data?

[@researchwithfawad]

Pleasure. I am glad you liked it. I am sorry but i do not have much experience with secondary data and its required assumptions.

[@farahhentati8509]

does the results reporting you provided follows APA ? very helpful video thanks !!!

[@researchwithfawad]

Thanks for watching. Not entirely.

[@elianedevries3296]

Hi Fawad, thank you for your explanation. Very helpful! I also have a question. Do I run PROCESS with my standardized computed variables, or do I use just the 'unstandardized' variables? and also, where should I place an interaction term? within the box 'mediators'? thank you in advance!

[@researchwithfawad]

Hi. You can run with both. Interpretation is easier with unstandardized. There is no need to out interaction. SPSS will calculate it.

[@eymenbak1r]

Love it !!

[@researchwithfawad]

Thank you.

[@bellafebriana8279]

Thank you for the explanation, Prof. It really helps me for doing my thesis. But, I want to ask you something. I am conducting a research about the influence of job autonomy (as X) to employee well being (as Y), with parallel mediator (M1: job crafting; and M2: leisure crafting) and a first stage moderator (W: workplace belongingness) for my bachelor's degree thesis in psychology, is model 7 the most suitable model for my research? Or do I have to repeat the process twice because I have 2 mediators? Or is there another model that is more suitable for me to use?

[@researchwithfawad]

Please check other process model with serial mediators and a moderator

[@jessicascott4905]

Hi. Thank you for the video. I need to complete a moderated mediation analysis, with the moderator being gender (categorical variable: male and female). Do I follow the steps in this video which uses a continuous variable as the moderator? Thanks in advance.

[@researchwithfawad]

Thanks. I am glad you liked it. Yes you can, but please watch the video on categorical moderator on the channel as well for better interpretation.

[@Sarbarbie]

If my moderator was found to be nonsignificant, do I still need to elaborately report the output of indirect effects of X on Y?

[@researchwithfawad]

Yes, even if it is insignificant. Report the possible reasons.

[@hebaemadEmad]

Dr. Thank alot. What is mean the value of gohnson Neman is negative

[@researchwithfawad]

Thanks for watching. What or why?

[@hebaemadEmad]

@@researchwithfawad why

[@harvinderpalsingh6751]

Thank you

[@researchwithfawad]

Thanks. I am glad you liked it

[@dodogex2918]

Thank you very much for a clear tutorial sir! I have a question: in this case, how would we write the interpretation, if for example the conditional indirect effect of the Low Level of Role Ambiguity is significant but at the High Level insignificant? I mean, how could we interprete it, if we have both significant and insignificant effects within one moderator? Thanks very much in advance sir!

[@researchwithfawad]

There is a moderating effect as the effect size is different at different levels

[@MrArdahazal]

Hi, Can I ask a question: In moderated mediation analysis, is it necessary for the direct effect of the mediation (M) on the dependent variable (DV) to be statistically significant, or is It only sufficient for the interaction effect of the moderated variable (W) and mediator (M) on the DV to be significant.

[@researchwithfawad]

Have you checked the index of moderated mediation. If that is significant there is moderated mediation. I would say that the impact of MV on DV needs to be significant as there should be mediation for it to be moderated.

[@MrArdahazal]

@@researchwithfawad hi I think as follows, but I need your confirmation: In classical mediation, for example, in model 4, the path "bi" indicating the effect of M on Y should definitely be statistically significant. However, for example, in moderated mediation, let us say in model 14, I think that the "b1i" path from MV to DV, which shows a mediation or direct effect, may be insignificant. In Model 14, we claim that moderator (V) already changes this relationship (b1i). For example, if the moderator is a binary variable such as gender, the b path for MV→ DV may be significant for males but insignificant for females. Thus, the conditional indirect effect hypothesis was confirmed. In summary, to talk about moderated mediation, it is not enough that only the "b3i" path indicating the effect of MiV on Y is significant. To probe this effect, we continue the interpretation with conditional indirect effects in the next section on the output.

[@pimmy-san3558]

Thank you very much for the videos professor! Your videos are very useful, and I have watched a lot for writing my thesis. I have no knowledge about how to run the statistic program before, that's why your videos are like gems to me. And may I ask a question, please? I also need to run the moderated mediation analysis, but I have four IVs. Do I have to repeat these steps with each of the IVs to interpret the result? Or are there other methods? Thank you very much, professor!!

[@researchwithfawad]

Pleasure. I am glad you liked it. Yes, you have to repeat the process as SPSS Hayes Process Macro limits the number of IVs and DVs.

[@ramizeineddine6098]

Hi professor, I hope you are doing great. I have a small question. So, I am trying to measure the effect of social media use on academic performance through Loneliness which I will treat as a meediator. I also have interecultural competence as a moderator. So, If I want to measure the mediation and moderation effect along with the effect of moderator on the mediation effect, is Hayess Process Macro Model 7 the most appropriate? Thank you in advance.

[@researchwithfawad]

Thanks for watching. Yes, you can use Model 7, if the moderator is between IV and MV, if moderator is between MV and DV use Model 14.

[@ramizeineddine6098]

@@researchwithfawad Thank you so much for your reply, it´s well appreciated. Alright that´s great. I have one more question if possible. Honestly, I am a bit worried that if after getting the results and making the analysis I get no significant relationship between my IV and DV then maybe the analysis of mediation and moderation will be meaningless and I will have almost nothing interesting to report in my thesis. Do you think this is the case or it´s totally okay if this happened and I can still have interesting findings?. Thank you again for you efforts and time.

[@researchwithfawad]

Insignificant findings doesn't mean that there is no reason for the study. You will need to provide justification in discussion. However, if all the results are significant this is a cause of concern

[@ramizeineddine6098]

@ResearchWithFawad yeah you're totally right professor. But what I meant is that because, as I know, if I get an insignificant relationship between the IV and the DV, then the mediation analysis and moderation analysis will be meaningless. Is it the case, or it's not.

[@MaurineAstolfi]

Hello Prof ! after running the model 7 analysis in spss, how can I see Johnson Neyman intervals and sample slopes analysis? because I don't have it !

[@researchwithfawad]

Please watch the video, you may not have selected the options.

[@frosted_cupcake6299]

Thanks for the excellent tutorial, sir. In a small sub-study, I took X as IV, M as DV, and W as a moderator. By running Model 1, I found that the moderation was not significant. Does this necessarily mean that there will be no moderated mediation by running model 7 by taking X as IV, Y as DV, M as mediator and W as moderator?

[@researchwithfawad]

No. No moderation doesn't mean that there will be no moderated mediation. Better to assess it through model 7 or 14.

[@merveyuksel3048]

Unfortunately, Johnson- Neyman intervals do not appear in my output. Why could this be? Can moderator variable in this model be categorical? Am I having trouble because my moderator variable in this model is categorical?

[@researchwithfawad]

The output is not part of Model 7.

[@muhammadaamirkhan8182]

If we've two mediators and both of their (mediating and moderated mediating) effects are insignificant, then is it considered to be a wrong model? Do we MUST have a mediating and/or moderated mediating effect in our model?

[@researchwithfawad]

No, it is not a wrong model. You can have mediator and moderator in a model but you do not need to assess the moderated mediation. You can check individual mediation and moderation effects. Further, you can also just check the individual relationships. However, the reviewer may ask you to check mediation. Hoe this helps.

[@annafienz]

Sir, which model is suitable for moderated mediation with 3 IV, 1DV, one mediator, one moderator ? is there tutorial involve similar model? Thank you sir.

[@researchwithfawad]

Please use SEM based tools like AMOS 9r SmartPLS

[@shaansandhu7982]

I do not have an average for the moderated mediation which is for the second table, have I do something incorrect?

[@researchwithfawad]

Please watch the video again, you may have missed something.

[@manjulaseneviratna4865]

When I do this process Model 7 with my SPSS, I got a positive sign for my moderator (w) and negative sign for Int_1 . I think this mean there is a positive moderation. I would like to know why I got negative sign for Int_1 ? Please help me

[@researchwithfawad]

Negative interaction means that the moderator weakens the relationship between IV and outcome.

[@fatimarahman4473]

I have question, can you please elaborate from where did you get the T value for indirect relationship?

[@researchwithfawad]

You can divide the estimate by standard error

[@muhammadaamirkhan8182]

If the interaction effect is not significant then should we still need to draw the interaction plot?

[@researchwithfawad]

No. If the interaction effect is not significant, the plot is not required.

[@renskekeulen3483]

Is it possible that the unstandardized coëfficient exeeds 1?

[@researchwithfawad]

Yes unstandardized Beta can be over 1

[@jahanvibansal7656]

Hi, which model is suitable for moderated mediation with one Independent, one dependent, one mediator, one moderator continuous variable. Kindly help with this

[@researchwithfawad]

You can ise both 7 and 14. But look into the theoretical support for the relationships.

[@anoukschippers3984]

Hi, were can I find the mediation results in the output? Is indirect effects with mean of moderator being 0 the mediation effect? I need to know my mediation effects without the moderator because the moderator isnt significant, but the mediator is.

[@researchwithfawad]

Please refer to the interpretation slide in the session and check the mediation at mean level of moderator (.0000).

[@anoukschippers3984]

Okay, thank you!

[@liulim3478]

Thanks for this clear video!!! However, I still have a question: How to interpret the result if OC and RA are nonsignificant (or one of them is nonsignificant) but the interaction (Int_1) is significant ( I use the form of the table of 3:43 ) ? Does the moderation effect still exist?Thank you very much, sir!

[@researchwithfawad]

If the interaction is significant, there is moderating effect.

[@liulim3478]

Thank you!!! How about if in the "Conditional Indirect Effects of X on Y", there are both significance and nonsignificance existing in different levels of "RA", but the "Index of Moderated Mediation" is nonsignificant: how should I interpret this result? Should the indirect effect still be nonsignificant? Thanks again and a lot, sir!

[@hinasamreen7808]

Sir I have a question. Please address my query. I am working on my research paper. I want to go for a moderated mediation analysis using Model 14. The analysis shows (interaction term) is significant, whereas, indirect effect is nonsignificant. Should I go with this analysis? What do you recommend?

[@researchwithfawad]

Yes you can proceed with the analysis.

[@hinasamreen7808]

@@researchwithfawad thanks

[@frosted_cupcake6299]

Sir, I got moderated mediation using data from a certain number of respondents. However, when I took data from about 20 more participants, the effect disappeared. Should I take more data because there was initially an effect?

[@researchwithfawad]

Yes, you can try to have some more data. This may help.

[@UsmanMehmood-b3l]

Aoa. Do you have any video that tells how to articulate a thesis with the model 7, as in what steps are required and what is the sequence? jazak ALLAH

[@UsmanMehmood-b3l]

As this video helped me in interpretation, but i need guidance in sequential reporting as well

[@researchwithfawad]

Sorry but dont have detailed video on how to use it in a thesis.

[@chanakawijewardena6746]

Hello, Prof. Thank you for the super helpful tutorial. How do you draw a chart by connecting the dots in SPSS? Or did you do it separately? I get the dots when I run the syntax, so a bit confused about how to get a nice chart, as you showed in the tutorial. Thank you so much.

[@researchwithfawad]

Thanks. You will need to collect dots manually

[@renskekeulen3483]

Hey, I want to execute this analysis. For my moderator, I have to use dummy coding (with 3 different categories). How should I integrate this in the analysis, since Proces by Hayes allows only 1 moderator?

[@researchwithfawad]

Please add the categorical moderator as it is without dummy coding and press multi categorical button and select the moderator variable.

[@Divya_new]

Sir, If I introduce a mediating variable, the relationship between IV and DV becomes significant but negative. Where is the problem? previously the IV, DV, and MV had positive and significant bivariate correlations. Kindly provide insights into the negative effects after entering the mediating variable.

[@researchwithfawad]

Is it just negative or also insignificant

[@Divya_new]

@@researchwithfawadsir, the p value is .00

[@researchwithfawad]

This shows competitive mediation. Please read about competitive mediation.

[@Divya_new]

@@researchwithfawad Sir, if it is insignificant, kindly suggest how to interpret the results.

[@shaansandhu7982]

This is for the probing moderated indirect relationship

[@researchwithfawad]

Yes,.it is

[@evaaaaa3621]

Hi, where did you get the Confidence Intervals (Low+High) for the indirect relationship Commitment > Learning > Performance? You indicated here it is 0.135/0.283, but I can't find this anywhere in the output. Thanks in advance!

[@researchwithfawad]

Please refer to Conditional indirect effect of X on Y, therein you will see BootLLCI and BootULCI

[@evaaaaa3621]

@@researchwithfawad Thanks for your quick response! However, in the output in the video, I can find these numbers as 0.1375 and 0.2844. Is this correct?

[@researchwithfawad]

Those are the indirect effects at mean level, you are right, i just rounded them off, instead for 0.1375 it should have been 0.138, apologies for the typo

[@gogoonus]

Hi Prof , your videos are very useful and thank you for your great help. I am working on moderated mediation on Smart PLS for my thesis to be submitted next month. Is it possible to make a video on that , it would be a great help. Thanks.

[@researchwithfawad]

Yes, Moderated Mediation video are in process. Hopefully within a week or so.

[@gogoonus]

@@researchwithfawad Greatly appreciated, thank you!

[@napatpaisatchayakul4343]

Hi! Prof.Fawad Thanks for the valuable video! May I ask you if my X is 1(seeing a) and 0 (didn't see a) and also if my W or moderator is 1(showing b) and 0 (not showing b) how could I prepare the data before running on this model. Thank you in advance for your help. :)

[@researchwithfawad]

Thanks. I am glad you liked it. If there are two categories (0, 1), you do not need to create any dummy variables. Just simply add the variables to the model in the Macro.

[@napatpaisatchayakul4343]

​@@researchwithfawad Ohh I can see the picture now! Thank you so much for your guidance and prompt response. I'm really really thankful for it! May I ask a bit more to make sure that I got it right? In that case, should I run this model 4 times to see all of the results? >> 1st time is x=1, w=1 / 2nd x=1, w=0 / 3rd x=0, w=1/ 4th x=0 w=0. Thank you so much once again for your advice.

[@researchwithfawad]

No, Please refer to this text from Hayes Macro Website (processmacro.org/faq.html) Question: My independent variable (X) or moderator (W, Z) is dichotomous. Can PROCESS handle this? Answer: PROCESS has always allowed dichotomous independent variables and moderators. Because the mathematics is the same for dichotomous X, W, and/or Z as it is for continuous variables, just put your dichotomous variable(s) in the PROCESS command or menu for X, W, and/or Z. You should NOT use the multicategorical option with a dichotomous independent variable or moderators. A multicategorical variable has three or more categories. In earlier releases of version 3, using the multicategorical option with a dichotomous independent variable or moderator could in some circumstances produce incorrect output (see the version history). As of version 3.3, PROCESS won't let you specify X, W, or Z as multicategorical when it is dichotomous. Note that you should never put a multicategorical variable in as X, W, or Z without telling PROCESS that the variable is multicategorical by using the multicategorical option. Doing so will generally produce nonsense output.

[@shamsbharwani4887]

Can I possibly get the dataset used in the video?

[@researchwithfawad]

I am afraid that is being used in a study.

[@shamsbharwani4887]

@@researchwithfawad No worries, thanks!

[@shamsbharwani4887]

@@researchwithfawad I wanted to see what I need to do to my moderator before I use it in my moderated mediation model using model 59. My moderator is either 0 or 1 to check for an item.

[@researchwithfawad]

I am afraid, i didn't quite get your question. What is it that you would like to check?

[@shamsbharwani4887]

@@researchwithfawad My moderator is 0 for Non-autistic and 1 for autistic. On the other note, do you have any videos on PROCESS Model 59? That would be great. I am working on my dissertation, and I am testing the moderation of the mediation effect using Model 59. Thanks