INTERACTIONS
I. Types of models
A.
All variables are nominal
1. Main effects
2. Factorial ANOVA
B.
All variables are quantitative
1. Multiple regression
C.
Both quantitative and nominal variables
1. Multiple regression
2. ANCOVA: no interaction
between nominal and quantitative
II. Interactions between nominal variables
A.
See categorical variables notes.
B. Create dummy variables that are the result of multiplying the
main effect dummy variables.
C. Could also create dummy variables that capture both traditional
main effects and interactions (e.g. orthogonal trend analysis contrasts).
III. Interactions between quantitative variables
A. Create new variable(s) which is the product of main effect
independent variables
B.
Example
f: authoritarianism
g: intelligence
Y: cognitive style
fg: interaction between
f and g
Y= a + b1f +
b2g + b3fg
In a model with an interaction, the slopes of each
independent variable depend on the value of the other variables:
Y= (b1 +b3g)f
+ (b2g + a) [1]
Y= (b2 + b3f)g
+ (b1f + a) [2]
correlations
Y f g fg
f .115 1
g -.483 -.274 1
fg -.455 -.759 .740 1
Mean 30.44 39.33 45.33 1987.8
sd 11.50 28.25 26.47 2261.9
N=108
Results of hierarchical regression on data above:
Y=a + b1f +b2g R2y.12= .233 F(2,105)=15.978** [3]
b1= -.008 t(105)= .209
b2=-.212 t(105)= -5.491 **
a= 40.3
Y=a
+ b1f +b2g + b3fg R2y.123=.332 F(3,104)=17.264** [4]
Change R2=.099,
F(1,104)=15.21 **
b1= -.232 t(104)= -3.493 **
b2= .0172 t(104)= .251
b3= -.00466 t(104)= -3.932 **
a= 48.1
Note that the bj change greatly when the
interaction term is added because of the high correlation between fg and main
effect variables.
Interpretation:
Although g would appear to have a significant main effect if one stopped
at the first step, the presence of a significant interaction means that one
must examine the quantitative variable equivalent of "simple main
effects" -- changes in slope due to the presence of the other variable.
Using [1] above: Y=(-.232 -
.00466g)f + (.0172g + 48.1)
[2] Y=(.0172 - .00466f)g + (-.232f + 48.1)
select values of f or g and observe
equations:
e.g. a low value of f, say 11.1 Y=-.035g + 45.5
a middle value of f, say 39.3 Y=-.166g + 39.0
a high value of f, say 67.6
Y=-.294g + 32.4
Conclusion: the effect of g on Y grows with size of f. To see the effect of adding the interaction
term, compare these equations to equation [3]: Y=-.008f -.212g +40.3. This equation underestimates the effect of g
for high values and overestimates the effect of g for low values. If one selects values of f as above,
equation [3] would yield:
for f = 11.1 Y=-.212g
+ 40.21
f = 39.3 Y=-.212g
+ 39.98
f = 67.6 Y=-.212g
+ 39.76
These are the equations of parallel lines that are
very close together, i.e. equation [3] suggests that f has very little effect
on Y.
To help interpret the interaction terms, one might
also set one factor equal to zero:
f = 0: Y=48.1 + .0172g
g = 0: Y=48.1 - .232 f
This is not meaningful in this example, unless f and
g are rescaled to deviation scores so that the zero value is in the middle of
the range of the independent variables.
Moral: Main
effects are uninterpretable in the presence of a significant interaction
without reference to that interaction.
IV. Interactions between nominal and
quantitative variables
A.
Steps in the analysis
1. Does the full model (with the interaction) account for a
significant proportion of the variance in Y (is the R2
significant)? If NO, stop; if YES go to
2.
2. Is there a significant interaction between the nominal and
quantitative variables?
a) calculate
(R2Y.abc - R2Y.ab)/(kfm-krm)
(1-R2Y.abc)/(N-kfm-1)
If YES, interpret the model as one would a model
with interactions between quantitative variables (i.e. calculate separate
regression lines for each level of the nominal variable); if NO, go to 3.
3. Is the bj for the continuous variable(s) in the
reduced model (without the interaction) significant (can use change in R2
measure if one has multiple correlated quantitative variables)? If NO, then reduce the model to a regression
on categorical variables; if YES, go to 4.
4. Are the bj for the dummy variables representing the
categorical factors significant (Can ask whether the change in R2
due to deleting these variables is significant)? If YES, then one has separate parallel regression lines; if NO,
then there is only one regression line and the categorical factor can be
deleted.
B. The test of the bj for a categorical variable in a
model with a significant quantitative variable and non-significant interactions
is an ANCOVA.
V. When not to report data in classic ANCOVA
format
A. Do not use ANCOVA format with non-overlapping groups or when
"adjustment of means" is meaningless for some other reason.
B. Example: From an ANCOVA
of the data in the graph below, one might be tempted to conclude that
controlling for SES, whites would still be more intelligent than blacks. However, since there are no whites in the
data at that level of SES, this statement is misleading. The appropriate conclusion is that SES
affects IQ scores in both blacks and whites.
