Estimation of the standard error and confidence interval of the indirect effect in multiple mediator models

By Nancy Briggs. 2006

129 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/865aea33898a998633254aa1394fc2c6e90da181

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

The Indirect Effects of Destination Image on Destination Loyalty Intention Through Tourist Satisfaction and Perceived Value: The Bootstrap Approach (2013, methodology): “In fact, this advantage of the bootstrap method for a mediation test has been supported by many existing simulation results (e.g., Briggs, 2006; Williams, 2004; Williams & MacKinnon, 2008).”
When, Why, and How Controversy Causes Conversation (2013, methodology): “We used biased-corrected bootstrapping (n = 5000, see Briggs 2006; Preacher and Hayes 2008 for a discussion on the advantages of this method) to generate 95% confidence intervals around these indirect effects (interest and discomfort), where successful mediation occurs if the confidence interval…”
Mindfulness and its Relationship with Perceived Stress, Affect and Burnout in Elite Junior Athletes (2015, unknown): “Kenny (1986) and Sobel’s test) in terms of power, multivariate non-normality, and testing multiple mediators (Briggs, 2006; MacKinnon, Lockwood, Hoffman, West, & Sheets, 2002; Preacher & Hayes, 2008).”
Contemporary approaches to assessing mediation in communication research. (2008, methodology): “Alternatively, the researcher may obtain the values of the moderator for which the indirect effect is statistically significant, an extension of the Johnson-Neyman technique (Johnson & Neyman, 1936; Rogosa, 1980, 1981). This strategy does not require the researcher to select arbitrary conditional va”
PROCESS : A Versatile Computational Tool for Observed Variable Mediation , Moderation , and Conditional Process Modeling 1 (2012, background): “The latter two are recommended, as they make fewer unrealistic assumptions than does the Sobel test about the shape of the sampling distribution of the indirect effect and are more powerful (Briggs, 2006; Fritz & MacKinnon, 2007; MacKinnon, Lockwood, & Williams, 2004; Williams & MacKinnon, 2008).”
Assessing Mediational Models: Testing and Interval Estimation for Indirect Effects (2010, background): “These approaches have been further extended to path models with multiple mediators (Briggs, 2006; Williams, 2004), multilevel models (Krull & MacKinnon, 2001; Pituch, Stapleton, & Kang, 2006; Pituch, Whittaker, & Stapleton, 2005), and structural equation models (M.”
Associations between the perceived quality of the coach–athlete relationship and athlete burnout: An examination of the mediating role of achievement goals (2016, methodology): “Moreover, it has been shown to perform better than other techniques in terms of power and reduction of Type I errors (Briggs, 2007).”