IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0271668.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Interaction effect: Are you doing the right thing?

Author

Listed:
  • Sara Garofalo
  • Sara Giovagnoli
  • Matteo Orsoni
  • Francesca Starita
  • Mariagrazia Benassi

Abstract

How to correctly interpret interaction effects has been largely discussed in scientific literature. Nevertheless, misinterpretations are still frequently observed, and neuroscience is not exempt from this trend. We reviewed 645 papers published from 2019 to 2020 and found that, in the 93.2% of studies reporting a statistically significant interaction effect (N = 221), post-hoc pairwise comparisons were the designated method adopted to interpret its results. Given the widespread use of this approach, we aim to: (1) highlight its limitations and how it can lead to misinterpretations of the interaction effect; (2) discuss more effective and powerful ways to correctly interpret interaction effects, including both explorative and model selection procedures. The paper provides practical examples and freely accessible online materials to reproduce all analyses.

Suggested Citation

  • Sara Garofalo & Sara Giovagnoli & Matteo Orsoni & Francesca Starita & Mariagrazia Benassi, 2022. "Interaction effect: Are you doing the right thing?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(7), pages 1-19, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0271668
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0271668
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0271668
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0271668&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0271668?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0271668. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.