I have a question about the interpretation of mediation models.
So i have a situation where I meet all but one of requirements for a significant mediation model.
It meets the following requirements:
X significantly predicts M
X predicts Y not controlling for M
The relationship between X and Y is reduced to non-significance when controlling for M
And the indirect effect through M is significant (due to the 95% CI not including zero)
So the only thing it doesnt satisfy is that the relationship between M and Y is not significant when controlling for X.
However, when I look at the simple relationship between M and Y (without X) it is significant.
Therefore I am confused how I would interpret these results. Clearly M is important in explaining the relationship between X and Y but without M to Y being significant, I can't claim that it is mediated by it.
Could this circumstance result from a lack of power? Is there not enough variance when controlling for X to find a significant relationship between M and Y? (I have a sample size of 27).
I really appreciate your help