RTI uses cookies to offer you the best experience online. By clicking “accept” on this website, you opt in and you agree to the use of cookies. If you would like to know more about how RTI uses cookies and how to manage them please view our Privacy Policy here. You can “opt out” or change your mind by visiting: http://optout.aboutads.info/. Click “accept” to agree.
The analysis of mechanisms and their contingencies
PROCESS versus structural equation modeling
Hayes, A. F., Montoya, A. K., & Rockwood, N. J. (2017). The analysis of mechanisms and their contingencies: PROCESS versus structural equation modeling. Australasian Marketing Journal, 25(1), 76-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ausmj.2017.02.001
Marketing, consumer, and organizational behavior researchers interested in studying the mechanisms by which effects operate and the conditions that enhance or inhibit such effects often rely on statistical mediation and conditional process analysis (also known as the analysis of "moderated mediation"). Model estimation is typically undertaken with ordinary least squares regression-based path analysis, such as implemented in the popular PROCESS macro for SPSS and SAS (Hayes, 2013), or using a structural equation modeling program. In this paper we answer a few frequently-asked questions about the difference between PROCESS and structural equation modeling and showbyway of example that, for observed variable models, the choice of which to use is inconsequential, as the results are largely identical. We end by discussing considerations to ponder when making the choice between PROCESS and structural equation modeling. (C) 2017 Australian and New Zealand Marketing Academy. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.