Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,534

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Analysis of Mechanisms and Their Contingencies: PROCESS versus Structural Equation Modeling

Hayes, Andrew F., Montoya, Amanda K., Rockwood, Nicholas J.·2017·Australasian Marketing Journal
DOI 10.1016/j.ausmj.2017.02.001
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Marketing, consumer, and organizational behavior researchers interested in studying the mechanisms by which effects operate and the conditions that enhance or inhibit such effects often rely on statistical mediation and conditional process analysis (also known as the analysis of “moderated mediation”). Model estimation is typically undertaken with ordinary least squares regression-based path analysis, such as implemented in the popular PROCESS macro for SPSS and SAS ( Hayes, 2013 ), or using a structural equation modeling program. In this paper we answer a few frequently-asked questions about the difference between PROCESS and structural equation modeling and show by way of example that, for observed variable models, the choice of which to use is inconsequential, as the results are largely identical. We end by discussing considerations to ponder when making the choice between PROCESS and structural equation modeling.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ausmj.2017.02.001

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 6 references

Research works printed but not linked: 25

  1. 10.1016/j.ausmj.2015.04.006 · DOI
  2. 10.1016/j.jvb.2010.09.007 · DOI
  3. 10.1080/00273171.2012.732901 · DOI
  4. 10.1177/1094428115595869 · DOI
  5. 10.1037/a0033805 · DOI · Paper page
  6. 10.1037/0021-9010.93.5.945 · DOI · Paper page
  7. Darlington R.B. Hayes A.F. Regression Analysis and Linear Models: Concepts, Applications, and Implementation 2017 The Guilford Press New York
  8. 10.1093/jcr/ucw006 · DOI
  9. 10.1037/1082-989X.12.1.1 · DOI · Paper page
  10. 10.1509/jmr.14.0175 · DOI
  11. Hayes A.F. Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach 2013 The Guilford Press New York
  12. 10.1177/0049124198026003003 · DOI · Paper page
  13. Kline R.B. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling fourth ed.2016 The Guilford Press New York
  14. 10.1016/j.ausmj.2016.10.002 · DOI
  15. 10.1037/a0024776 · DOI
  16. 10.1037/0033-2909.114.1.185 · DOI
  17. Marsh H.W., 2013, A Second Course in Structural Equation Modeling
  18. 10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.852 · DOI · Paper page
  19. 10.1111/spc3.12237 · DOI
  20. 10.1016/j.ausmj.2015.04.009 · DOI
  21. 10.1509/jmr.14.0563 · DOI
  22. Shenu-Fen Y., 2012, Aust. Mark. J., 20, 48, 10.1016/j.ausmj.2011.10.014 · DOI
  23. 10.1016/j.ausmj.2011.10.001 · DOI
  24. 10.1509/jmr.12.0388 · DOI
  25. 10.1016/j.tourman.2016.10.008 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Hayes, A. F., Montoya, A. K., & Rockwood, N. J.
Venue
Australasian Marketing Journal
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2017-02
Volume
25
Issue
1
Pages
76-81
ISSN
  • 1441-3582 (ISSN-L)
  • 1839-3349
DOI
10.1016/j.ausmj.2017.02.001
OpenAlex
W2589167453
Cited by
1,534
References
6
FWCI
55.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.