Assignment # 3

Fahad Hussain Siddiqui

20181-23527

Note: I did not knew the full forms of the variables so I took the following variables as dependent,
independent and mediators:

CI = Dependent Variable.

PV = Independent Variable.

SQ = Mediator.

Analysis:

In step 1 of the mediation model the regression of PV on CI ignoring the mediator SQ was significant,
b=0.84, t=23.02, p=<0.001. Step 2 showed that the regression of PV on the mediator, SQ was also
significant b=0.81, t=28.50, p=<0.001. Step 3 of the mediation process showed that the mediator (SQ),
controlling for PV, was significant b=0.52, t=6.93, p=<0.001. Step 4 of the analysis revealed that PV
controlling for the mediator (SQ) was a significant predictor of CI, b=0.42, t=6.06, p=<0.001. A Sobel test
was conducted and found full mediation in the model (z=6.73, p=0.0000). It was found that SQ fully
mediated the relationship between PV and CI.

Results from the SPSS are:

Run MATRIX procedure:

************** PROCESS Procedure for SPSS Release 2.15 *******************

Written by Andrew F. Hayes, Ph.D. www.afhayes.com

Documentation available in Hayes (2013). www.guilford.com/p/hayes3

**************************************************************************
Model = 4
Y = CI
X = PV
M = SQ

Sample size
249

**************************************************************************
Outcome: SQ

Model Summary
R R-sq MSE F df1 df2 p
.8757 .7668 .2184 812.3898 1.0000 247.0000 .0000

Model
coeff se t p LLCI ULCI
constant .6863 .1071 6.4087 .0000 .4754 .8972
PV .8152 .0286 28.5025 .0000 .7588 .8715

**************************************************************************
Outcome: CI

Model Summary
R R-sq MSE F df1 df2 p
.8568 .7341 .3011 339.5754 2.0000 246.0000 .0000

Model
coeff se t p LLCI ULCI
constant .2844 .1358 2.0937 .0373 .0168 .5519
SQ .5180 .0747 6.9318 .0000 .3708 .6651
PV .4215 .0696 6.0601 .0000 .2845 .5585

************************** TOTAL EFFECT MODEL ****************************

Outcome: CI

Model Summary
R R-sq MSE F df1 df2 p
.8259 .6822 .3585 530.1196 1.0000 247.0000 .0000

Model
coeff se t p LLCI ULCI
constant .6398 .1372 4.6630 .0000 .3696 .9101
PV .8438 .0366 23.0243 .0000 .7716 .9159

***************** TOTAL, DIRECT, AND INDIRECT EFFECTS ********************

Total effect of X on Y
Effect SE t p LLCI ULCI
.8438 .0366 23.0243 .0000 .7716 .9159

Direct effect of X on Y
Effect SE t p LLCI ULCI
.4215 .0696 6.0601 .0000 .2845 .5585

Indirect effect of X on Y
Effect Boot SE BootLLCI BootULCI
SQ .4222 .0736 .2894 .5872

Partially standardized indirect effect of X on Y

Effect Boot SE BootLLCI BootULCI
SQ .3984 .0696 .2701 .5491

Completely standardized indirect effect of X on Y

Effect Boot SE BootLLCI BootULCI
SQ .4133 .0731 .2778 .5714

Ratio of indirect to total effect of X on Y

Effect Boot SE BootLLCI BootULCI
SQ .5004 .0942 .3288 .6975

Ratio of indirect to direct effect of X on Y

Effect Boot SE BootLLCI BootULCI
SQ 1.0017 .4708 .4898 2.3057
R-squared mediation effect size (R-sq_med)
Effect Boot SE BootLLCI BootULCI
SQ .6425 .0356 .5727 .7116

Preacher and Kelley (2011) Kappa-squared

Effect Boot SE BootLLCI BootULCI
SQ .3540 .0560 .2389 .4578

Normal theory tests for indirect effect

Effect se Z p
.4222 .0627 6.7316 .0000

******************** ANALYSIS NOTES AND WARNINGS *************************

Number of bootstrap samples for bias corrected bootstrap confidence intervals:

1000

Level of confidence for all confidence intervals in output:

95.00

------ END MATRIX -----