Mean-Centering Does Not Alleviate Collinearity Problems in Moderated Multiple Regression Models

The cross-product term in moderated regression may be collinear with its constituent parts, making it difficult to detect main, simple, and interaction effects. The literature shows that mean-centering can reduce the covariance between the linear and the interaction terms, thereby suggesting that it reduces collinearity. We analytically prove that mean-centering neither changes the computational precision of parameters, the sampling accuracy of main effects, simple effects, interaction effects, nor the R2. We also show that the determinants of the cross product matrix X' X are identical for uncentered and mean-centered data, so the collinearity problem in the moderated regression is unchanged by mean-centering. Many empirical marketing researchers commonly mean-center their moderated regression data hoping that this will improve the precision of estimates from ill conditioned, collinear data, but unfortunately, this hope is futile. Therefore, researchers using moderated regression models should not mean-center in a specious attempt to mitigate collinearity between the linear and the interaction terms. Of course, researchers may wish to mean-center for interpretive purposes and other reasons.

[1]  Donald R. Lehmann,et al.  Setting Quality Expectations When Entering a Market: What Should the Promise Be? , 2006 .

[2]  J. D. Sherman,et al.  Failures to detect moderating effects with ordinary least squares-moderated multiple regression: Some reasons and a remedy. , 1986 .

[3]  Joseph A. Cote,et al.  Multicollinearity and Measurement Error in Structural Equation Models: Implications for Theory Testing , 2004 .

[4]  Jeffrey D. Kromrey,et al.  Mean Centering in Moderated Multiple Regression: Much Ado about Nothing , 1998 .

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

[6]  J. Jaccard,et al.  Interaction effects in multiple regression , 1992 .

[7]  Werner Reinartz,et al.  Empirical generalizations from brand extension research: How sure are we? , 2006 .

[8]  Jeffrey M. Wooldridge,et al.  Solutions Manual and Supplementary Materials for Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data , 2003 .

[9]  Bruce D. McCullough,et al.  Assessing the Reliability of Statistical Software: Part I , 1998 .

[10]  P. Bottomley,et al.  Do We Really Know how Consumers Evaluate Brand Extensions? Empirical Generalizations Based on Secondary Analysis of Eight Studies , 2001 .

[11]  Subhash Sharma,et al.  Identification and Analysis of Moderator Variables , 1981 .

[12]  E. Ziegel.  Introduction to the Theory and Practice of Econometrics , 1989 .

[13]  David A. Belsley.  Demeaning Conditioning Diagnostics through Centering , 1984 .

[14]  L. Cronbach.  Statistical tests for moderator variables: flaws in analyses recently proposed , 1987 .

[15]  G. McClelland,et al.  Misleading Heuristics and Moderated Multiple Regression Models , 2001 .

[16]  David A. Belsley,et al.  Conditioning Diagnostics: Collinearity and Weak Data in Regression , 1991 .

[17]  C. Lance.  Residual Centering, Exploratory and Confirmatory Moderator Analysis, and Decomposition of Effects in Path Models Containing Interactions , 1988 .