Hello Statalist members,
I have two models, Model 1 tests the direct effects of my Independent variable and Moderating variable on the DV (Y = a + X + M), whereas Model 2 includes the interaction effect of the two variables (Y = a + X + M + X*M) (all variables are continous).
In Model 1, both the independent variable as the moderating variable are insignificant predictors of my DV. When I include the interaction variable (Model 2), all three variables become significant. Please see the attached image.
One of my hypothesis in my study proposes that when Moderating variable (M) increases, the relationship between my IV and DV becomes stronger (more positive). Since I did not find any significant (direct) relationship between my IV and DV in Model 1, how should I interpret the significant results found in Model 2?
I am guessing that with these results I did not find evidence to support my hypothesis, but I would like to verify it.
I would like to hear your opinion!
Thanks in advance.
I have two models, Model 1 tests the direct effects of my Independent variable and Moderating variable on the DV (Y = a + X + M), whereas Model 2 includes the interaction effect of the two variables (Y = a + X + M + X*M) (all variables are continous).
In Model 1, both the independent variable as the moderating variable are insignificant predictors of my DV. When I include the interaction variable (Model 2), all three variables become significant. Please see the attached image.
One of my hypothesis in my study proposes that when Moderating variable (M) increases, the relationship between my IV and DV becomes stronger (more positive). Since I did not find any significant (direct) relationship between my IV and DV in Model 1, how should I interpret the significant results found in Model 2?
I am guessing that with these results I did not find evidence to support my hypothesis, but I would like to verify it.
I would like to hear your opinion!
Thanks in advance.
