Hello, I originally posted this on the stats stack exchange site, but given its focus on R software, it was removed -- so I figured I'd post here. I'm having trouble interpreting a change in effect direction and significance when I add an interaction term to my glmer() model. *Part 1* I ran an experiment in which participants made categorical decisions (out of two categories) in one of two conditions. The conditional manipulations were within-subject, and there were 8 trials total. For my initial model, I used glmer(): glmer(factor(categorization) ~ condition + (1 + condition | subject) + (1 | subject) + (1 | item), data = coded, family=binomial) Comparing this to the null model (without *condition* as a predictor) results in a very low p-value, where X^2=43.5, p<.00001 (4.2 * 10^-11). This is in line with our plot (which I can include if necessary), which shows a very significant effect of condition. Additionally, the model output shows a significant effect of condition: conditionno_belief 2.1733 0.3123 6.959 3.43e-12 *** *Part 2* Then, I ran another experiment to assess individual differences, such that each participant was associated with a reading comprehension score (and some other scores). I ran another glmer() model with an interaction term between reading comprehension ("rc") and condition: glmer(factor(categorization) ~ condition * rc + (1 | subject) + (1 | stimNum), data = new.coded, family=binomial) I'm having a really hard time interpreting these results: conditionno_belief -2.30562 1.08306 -2.129 0.033271 * rc -0.24367 0.08607 -2.831 0.004639 ** conditionno_belief:rc 0.46426 0.12185 3.810 0.000139 *** (I also realize that subjects are included just as random intercepts instead of random slopes in this second model.) *Questions* There are several things I'm unsure about: 1. How does glmer() treat dummy variables (e.g. categories like "conditionA" and "conditionB", or "optionA" and "optionB")? That is, how can I interpret the effect direction (whether the z-value is negative or positive)? 2. I've plotted the relationship between effect and reading comprehension, and conducted separate analyses, and found no relationship there. And yet this model seems to be saying that once I factor in reading comprehension as a main effect, the effect direction of condition reverses (and becomes less significant). This just seems very counterintuitive to me, given the huge effect of condition in the initial model (and visualization), and the lack of a significant relationship between effect and RC in other analyses. Why might this be? 3. Is there a way to add an interaction term without glmer() also looking at the main effect of each of those terms? (Which I want to do for reading comprehension.) Thank you! Please let me know if you need other information. [[alternative HTML version deleted]]