Prevention Science

, Volume 14, Issue 2, pp 189–192 | Cite as

Exploring Connections Between Moderators and Mediators: Commentary on Subgroup Analyses in Intervention Research

  • Alexander J. RothmanEmail author


Although subgroup analyses, and moderator analyses more generally, in intervention research are fraught with analytic and conceptual challenges, they provide invaluable insights into the effectiveness of intervention strategies and the theoretical models upon which they rest. The papers in this Special Issue engage these challenges and offer investigators a set of strategies that will enhance how they think about, measure, test, and report evidence of moderated intervention effects. In this commentary, I echo the call for more thoughtful work on moderated intervention effects and, in particular, urge investigators to pursue opportunities to integrate questions regarding mediation as they work to specify how intervention strategies operate across populations, settings, and behavioral domains.


Moderators Mediators Health behavior theory Intervention 


  1. Almirall, D., McCaffrey, D. F., Ramchand, R., & Murphy, S. A. (2012). Subgroups analysis when treatment and moderators are time-varying. Prevention Science.Google Scholar
  2. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bloom, H. S., & Michalopoulos, C. (2012). When is the story in the subgroups? Strategies for interpreting and reporting intervention effects for subgroups. Prevention Science.Google Scholar
  4. Borenstein, M., & Higgins, J. P. T., (2012). Meta-analysis and subgroups. Prevention Science.Google Scholar
  5. Brown, C. H. et al. (2012). Methods for synthesizing findings on moderation effects across multiple randomized trials. Prevention Science.Google Scholar
  6. Fairchild, A. J., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2009). A general model for testing mediation and moderation effects. Prevention Science, 10, 87–99.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Farrell, A. D., Henry, D. B., & Bettencourt, A. (2012). Methodological challenges examining subgroup differences: Examples from universal school-based youth violence prevention trials. Prevention Science.Google Scholar
  8. Kiesler, D. J. (1966). Some myths of psychotherapy research and the search for a paradigm. Psychological Bulletin, 65, 110–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. King, A. C., Ahn, D. F., Atienza, A., & Kraemer, H. C. (2008). Exploring refinements in targeted behavioral medicine intervention to advance public health. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 35, 251–260.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kraemer, H. C., Kiernan, M., Essex, M., & Kupfer, D. J. (2008). How and why criteria defining moderators and mediators differ between the Baron & Kenny and MacArthur approaches. Health Psychology, 27, S101–S108.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lanza, S. T., & Rhodes, B. L. (2012). Latent class analysis: An alternative perspective on subgroup analysis in prevention and treatment. Prevention Science.Google Scholar
  12. MacKinnon, D. P. (2008). Introduction to statistical mediation analysis. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  13. McGuire, W. J. (1989). A perspectivist approach to the strategic planning of programmatic scientific research. In B. Gholson, W. R. Shadish Jr., R. A. Neimeyer, & A. C. Houts (Eds.), Psychology of science: Contributions to metascience (pp. 214–245). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Muller, D., Judd, C. M., & Yzerbyt, V. Y. (2005). When moderation is mediated and mediation is moderated. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 853–863.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Paul, G. L. (1967). Strategy of outcome research in psychotherapy. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 31, 109–118.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Preacher, K. J., Rucker, D. D., & Hayes, A. F. (2007). Addressing moderated mediation hypotheses: Theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 42, 185–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Rothman, A. J. (2004). Is there nothing more practical than a good theory?: Why innovations and advances in health behavior change will arise if interventions are more theory-friendly. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 1, 11.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Rothman, A. J., & Baldwin, A. S. (2012). A person x intervention strategy approach to understanding health behavior. In K. Deaux & M. Snyder (Eds.), Handbook of personality and social psychology (pp. 729–752). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Rothman, A. J., & Salovey, P. (2007). The reciprocal relation between principles and practice: Social psychology and health behavior. In A. Kruglanski & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (2nd ed., pp. 826–849). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  20. Wang, R., & Ware, J. H. (2012). Detecting moderator effects using subgroup analyses. Prevention Science.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Prevention Research 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of MinnesotaMinneapolisUSA

Personalised recommendations