2
$\begingroup$

I am interested in studying the interaction with a ordinal predictor p and continuous moderator m on an outcome y with a simple model of:

y ~ p + m + p*m

However, since my predictor is categorical, it is easier for me to plot how the relationship between outcome y and moderator m (both continuous) changes for different categories of predictor p.

That is, y is on the y axis, m is on the x axis and I draw several lines with different slopes for each category of predictor p. Would this be a valid way to plot the interaction effect if I am ONLY interested in the moderation effect of m and not its direct relationship with outcome y?

I think it is because if there is an interaction effect, then it should be bidirectional- that is, m modifies the relationship between y and p and p would modify the relationship between y and m, is that correct?

$\endgroup$
3
$\begingroup$

Just from a methodological view:

if you plot the interaction of P*M on Y and put m on the x-axis, then p becomes your moderator as you are plotting the effect of M on Y, conditional on the level of P.

However, mathematically it does not make a difference. Which brings me to the answer to your question. A interaction is always "bidirectional" as you call it. You multiply M*P and from a mathematical point of view, it makes no difference which you consider the moderator the results would not change.

So you are correct when saying "m modifies the relationship between y and p and p would modify the relationship between y and m".

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Right that is my concern as well as I am reversing the role of the moderator and predictor, so I am not sure if my graph makes sense at all. For example, if I see a difference in slopes across levels of P, then clearly P modifies M. However, does that also imply that M modifies P to a similar degree? $\endgroup$ – hlinee Dec 5 '18 at 12:50
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, if you did not dummy code your varaible. So in your regression equation Y~b0+b1*p+b2*m+b3*(p*m), the b3 is the interaction effect, this effect is added on top of the b0+b1*p+b2*m. So lets assume P=1 and M=5, then b3(1*5) or differently 5 times the regression coefficient are added. If P=1 and M=6 then 6 time the regression coefficient is added. If P=2 and M=5 then 10 times the interaction effect is added. The interaction effect itself remains the same. But a change in P has a bigger effect on the estimate because the scale of P is smaller than the one of M. $\endgroup$ – Tim Dec 5 '18 at 12:58
  • $\begingroup$ Actually, p is dummy coded as it is an ordinal variable, but m is continuous- how does that affect the interpretation? $\endgroup$ – hlinee Dec 6 '18 at 10:32

Your Answer

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

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.