|
|
Bias due to conditioning on a collider |
|
Message/Author |
|
nata posted on Monday, March 10, 2014 - 2:22 am
|
|
|
Dear Mplus-Team, I am running a full SEM Which I have 9 observed binary indicators (x1-x11), 3 latent factor (f1-f3), 1 mediating variable (m), 3 confounders (x12-x14) and 1 binary outcome (y) . The model is the Following: BY f1 x1-x4; f2-BY x5 x8; f3-BY x9 x11; y ON m f1 f2 f3 x12 x13 x14; ON m f1 f2 f3 x12 x13 x14; f1 ON x12 x13 x14; ON f1 f2 f3 x12 x13 x14; ON f1 f3 x12 x13 x14; Now, if the model is correct from a syntactic point of view, the variable m should be a collider. I was wondering if the estimates of the direct and indirect effects on y that provides Mplus are biased or not? Thanks |
|
|
You have 3 statements starting with ON which does not translate to Mplus language. If the model is correctly specified, there is no bias. |
|
nata posted on Wednesday, March 12, 2014 - 3:53 am
|
|
|
Sorry, probably there was a problem in the copy&past process. Here is the exact formulation of the model: f1 BY x1-x4; f2 BY x5-x8; f3 BY x9-x11; y ON m f1 f2 f3 x12 x13 x14; m ON f1 f2 f3 x12 x13 x14; f1 ON x12 x13 x14; f2 ON f1 f3 x12 x13 x14; f3 ON f1 x12 x13 x14; Thanks |
|
|
This model specification looks fine. Under the usual causal inference assumptions, the Mplus Model Indirect estimates of direct and indirect effects are consistent. |
|
Back to top |
|
|