We get many questions from clients who use the terms mediator and moderator interchangeably.
They are easy to confuse, yet mediation and moderation are two distinct terms that require distinct statistical approaches.
The key difference between the concepts can be compared to a case where a moderator lets you know when an association will occur while a mediator will inform you how or why it occurs.
Mediators can affect the relationship between X and Y. Moderators can affect the scale and magnitude of that relationship. And sometimes the mediators and moderators affect each other.
In a statistical model–any statistical model–there is generally one way that a predictor X and a response Y can relate:
This relationship can take on different forms, of course, like a line or a curve, but there’s really only one relationship here to measure.
Usually the point is to model the predictive or explanatory ability, the effect, of X on Y.
In other words, there is a clear response variable*, although not necessarily a causal relationship. We could have switched the direction of the arrow to indicate that Y predicts X. Or used a two-headed arrow to show a correlation, with no direction, but that’s a whole other story.
For our purposes, Y is the response variable and X the predictor.
But a third variable–another predictor–can relate to X and Y in a number of different ways. How this predictor relates to X and Y changes how we interpret the relationship between X and Y. (more…)
One of the biggest questions I get is about the difference between mediators, moderators, and how they both differ from control variables.
I recently found a fabulous free video tutorial on the difference between mediators, moderators, and suppressor variables, by Jeremy Taylor at Stats Make Me Cry. The witty example is about the different types of variables–talent, practice, etc.–that explain the relationship between having a guitar and making lots of $$.