Do simple slopes follow-up tests lead us astray? Advancements in the visualization and reporting of interactions.

Statistical interactions between two continuous variables in linear regression are common in psychological science. As a follow-up analysis of how the moderator impacts the predictor-outcome relationship, researchers often use the pick-a-point simple slopes method. The simple slopes method requires researchers to make two decisions: (a) which moderator values should be used for plotting and testing simple slopes, and (b) which predictor should be considered the moderator. These decisions are meant to be driven by theory, but in practice researchers may use arbitrary conventions or theoretical reasons may not exist. Even when done thoughtfully, simple slopes analysis omits important information about the interaction. Consequently, it is problematic that the simple slopes approach is the primary basis for interpreting interactions. A more nuanced alternative is to utilize the Johnson-Neyman technique in conjunction with a regression plane depicting the interaction effect in three-dimensional space. This approach does not involve picking points but rather shows the slopes at all possible values of the predictor variables and gives both predictors equal weight instead of selecting a de facto moderator. Because this approach is complex and user-friendly implementation tools are lacking, we present a tutorial explaining the Johnson-Neyman technique and how to visualize interactions in 3-D space along with a new open-source tool that completes these procedures. We discuss how this approach facilitates interpretation and communication as well as its implications for replication efforts, transparency, and clinical applications. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

[1]  Sander Greenland,et al.  Scientists rise up against statistical significance , 2019, Nature.

[2]  Paul B. Sharp,et al.  Mechanistic Science: A New Approach to Comprehensive Psychopathology Research That Relates Psychological and Biological Phenomena , 2019, Clinical Psychological Science.

[3]  D. R. Saunders Moderator Variables in Prediction , 1956 .

[4]  R. Darlington,et al.  Regression and Linear Models , 1990 .

[5]  S. West,et al.  Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions. , 1994 .

[6]  R. Friedrich In Defense of Multiplicative Terms In Multiple Regression Equations , 1982 .

[7]  A. Simons,et al.  Diathesis-stress theories in the context of life stress research: implications for the depressive disorders. , 1991, Psychological bulletin.

[8]  Daniel J Bauer,et al.  Probing Interactions in Fixed and Multilevel Regression: Inferential and Graphical Techniques , 2005, Multivariate behavioral research.

[9]  J. Neyman,et al.  Tests of certain linear hypotheses and their application to some educational problems. , 1936 .

[10]  Andrew F. Hayes,et al.  A Tutorial on Testing, Visualizing, and Probing an Interaction Involving a Multicategorical Variable in Linear Regression Analysis , 2017 .

[11]  K. Sher,et al.  The relation between personality and anxiety: findings from a 3-year prospective study. , 1998, Journal of abnormal psychology.

[12]  Jane Lawrence Sumner,et al.  Marginal Effects in Interaction Models: Determining and Controlling the False Positive Rate , 2018 .

[13]  M. Prichard,et al.  A three-dimensional model to analyze drug-drug interactions. , 1990, Antiviral research.

[14]  G. Brody,et al.  Confidence intervals for distinguishing ordinal and disordinal interactions in multiple regression. , 2015, Psychological methods.

[15]  Jay Belsky,et al.  Beyond diathesis stress: differential susceptibility to environmental influences. , 2009, Psychological bulletin.

[16]  John G. Lynch,et al.  Spotlights, Floodlights, and the Magic Number Zero: Simple Effects Tests in Moderated Regression , 2012 .

[17]  M. Nock,et al.  Evidence for an emotion-cognition interaction in the statistical prediction of suicide attempts. , 2011, Behaviour research and therapy.

[18]  Connor McCabe,et al.  Improving Present Practices in the Visual Display of Interactions , 2018, Advances in methods and practices in psychological science.

[19]  Jason W Miller,et al.  Extensions of the Johnson-Neyman Technique to Linear Models With Curvilinear Effects: Derivations and Analytical Tools , 2013, Multivariate behavioral research.

[20]  J. Dawson Moderation in Management Research: What, Why, When, and How , 2014 .

[21]  Nicholas J. Rockwood,et al.  Regression-based statistical mediation and moderation analysis in clinical research: Observations, recommendations, and implementation. , 2017, Behaviour research and therapy.

[22]  William D. Berry,et al.  Improving Tests of Theories Positing Interaction , 2012 .

[23]  Daniel J. Bauer,et al.  Computational Tools for Probing Interactions in Multiple Linear Regression, Multilevel Modeling, and Latent Curve Analysis , 2006 .

[24]  J. Belsky,et al.  Distinguishing ordinal and disordinal interactions. , 2012, Psychological methods.