2
$\begingroup$

I am working on a SEM where I hypothesize a causal chain where A influences B, which in turn influences C. The data are from a 2x2 between-subjects experiment, N = 297.

All the goodness of fit indices look very good: chi-square p-value = .07 CFI = .991 TLI = .989 RMSEA = .028, PCLOSE = .992 Both the A>B path and the B>C path are significant, as predicted.

Now, here is my problem. The A>C path is not significant, neither before nor after adding the B variable. Based on this:

  1. Would it be correct to claim that A has "an indirect effect" on C? Or what would be a more correct description?
  2. Is this a case of mediation or of some other form of indirect effect?
  3. Should there always be a A>C path in models with indirect effects of this kind?

Thanks so much in advance for your kind help!

Matteo

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.