Understanding Main and Interaction Effects

  • Gondy Leroy
Part of the Health Informatics book series (HI)


The first part of this book described the principles underlying experimental design and the associated statistical analyses. The second part focuses on the practical aspects of conducting experiments. Understanding the underlying principles is essential to conduct a successful study. In addition it is helpful to know how to put those principles into practice in an efficient manner that is respectful and beneficial to the different stakeholders.

This chapter focuses on recognizing different effects in the results and using the correct terminology to describe them. Both main and interaction effects are systematically introduced for studies with one, two and three independent variables. Main effects can be found in studies with one or more independent variables. Interaction effects can be found in studies with two or more independent variables.


Interaction Effect Irritable Bowel Syndrome Average Score Veteran Affair Facial Recognition 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Ljótsson B, Falk L, Vesterlund A, Hedman E, Lindfors P, Rück C, Hursti T, Andréewitch S, Jansson L, Lindefor N, Andersson G (2010) Internet-delivered exposure and mindfulness based therapy for irritable bowel syndrome – a randomized controlled trial. Behav Res Ther 48(6):531–539. doi: doi:doi:10.1016/j.brat.2010.03.003 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baur DA, Pusateri AE, Kudryk VL, Jordan R, Ringgold C, Vandre R, Baker T (1998) Accuracy of orthognathic evaluation using telemedicine technology. Telemed J 4(2):153–160PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fielstein EM, Brown SH, McBrine CS, Clark TK, Hardenbrook SP, Speroff T (2006) The effect of standardized, computer-guided templates on quality of VA disability exams. In: AMIA annual fall symposium, Washington DC, 11–15 November 2006, pp 249–253Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Murphy GC, Friedman CP, Elstein AS, Wolf FM, Miller T, Miller JG (1996) The influence of a decision support system on the differential diagnosis of medical practitioners at three levels of training. In: AMIA annual fall symposium, 1996, pp 219–223Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bigman CA, Cappella JN, Hornik RC (2010) Effective or ineffective: attribute framing and the human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccine. Patient Educ Couns 81(Suppl):S70–76PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rickert VI, Graham CJ, Fisher R, Gottlieb A (1993) A comparison of methods for alcohol and marijuana anticipatory guidance with adolescents. J Adolesc Health 14(3):225–230PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bellucci DM (2000) The effectiveness of computer-assisted cognitive rehabilitation for patients with chronic mental illness. The New School University, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cruz M, Cruz RF, Krupinski EA, Lopez AM, McNeeley RM, Weinstein RS (2004) Effect of camera resolution and bandwidth on facial affect recognition. Telemed J E-Health 10(3):392–402Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Carlbring P, Björnstjerna E, Bergström AF, Waara J, Andersson G (2007) Applied relaxation: an experimental analogue study of therapist vs. computer administration. Comput Hum Behav 23:2–10Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Information Systems and TechnologyClaremont Graduate UniversityClaremontUSA

Personalised recommendations