ArticleBehavior research methods2024
How do manipulation checks interfere with the inference of causal relationships?
Article in Behavior research methods, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study investigates the performance of mediation analyses, including manipulation check variables, in experimental studies where manipulated psychological attributes are independent variables. We simulated the level of manipulation intensities and measurement errors of the manipulation check variable to test the validity of the analytic practice. Our results showed that when manipulation is successful and measurement error is low, mediation analyses with the manipulation check variable revealed an unstable path coefficient and standard error. Moreover, many of the detected indirect effects were inconsistent mediation situations. However, when individual differences in psychological attributes remained within the condition (low manipulation intensity) and the manipulation check variable contained low measurement error, the indirect effect indicated the validity of the manipulation. We discuss the implications of our findings for the use of manipulation checks in experimental research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.