Meta-analysis of Monte Carlo simulations examining class enumeration accuracy with mixture models.

IF 7.6 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Psychological methods Pub Date : 2024-12-12 DOI:10.1037/met0000716
Tiffany A Whittaker, Jihyun Lee, Devin Dedrick, Christina Muñoz
{"title":"Meta-analysis of Monte Carlo simulations examining class enumeration accuracy with mixture models.","authors":"Tiffany A Whittaker, Jihyun Lee, Devin Dedrick, Christina Muñoz","doi":"10.1037/met0000716","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article walks through steps to conduct a meta-analysis of Monte Carlo simulation studies. The selected Monte Carlo simulation studies focused on mixture modeling, which is becoming increasingly popular in the social and behavioral sciences. We provide details for the following steps in a meta-analysis: (a) formulating a research question; (b) identifying the relevant literature; (c) screening of the literature; (d) extracting data; (e) analyzing the data; and (f) interpreting and discussing the findings. Our goal was to investigate which simulation design factors (moderators) impact class enumeration accuracy in mixture modeling analyses. We analyzed the meta-analytic data using a generalized linear mixed model with a multilevel structure and examined the impact of the design moderators on the outcome of interest with a meta-regression model. For instance, the Bayesian information criterion was found to perform more accurately in conditions with larger sample sizes whereas entropy was found to perform more accurately with smaller sample sizes. It is hoped that this article can serve as a guide for others to follow in order to quantitatively synthesize results from Monte Carlo simulation studies. In turn, the findings from meta-analyzing Monte Carlo simulation studies can provide more details about factors that influence outcomes of interest as well as help methodologists when planning Monte Carlo simulation studies. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":20782,"journal":{"name":"Psychological methods","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological methods","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000716","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article walks through steps to conduct a meta-analysis of Monte Carlo simulation studies. The selected Monte Carlo simulation studies focused on mixture modeling, which is becoming increasingly popular in the social and behavioral sciences. We provide details for the following steps in a meta-analysis: (a) formulating a research question; (b) identifying the relevant literature; (c) screening of the literature; (d) extracting data; (e) analyzing the data; and (f) interpreting and discussing the findings. Our goal was to investigate which simulation design factors (moderators) impact class enumeration accuracy in mixture modeling analyses. We analyzed the meta-analytic data using a generalized linear mixed model with a multilevel structure and examined the impact of the design moderators on the outcome of interest with a meta-regression model. For instance, the Bayesian information criterion was found to perform more accurately in conditions with larger sample sizes whereas entropy was found to perform more accurately with smaller sample sizes. It is hoped that this article can serve as a guide for others to follow in order to quantitatively synthesize results from Monte Carlo simulation studies. In turn, the findings from meta-analyzing Monte Carlo simulation studies can provide more details about factors that influence outcomes of interest as well as help methodologists when planning Monte Carlo simulation studies. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对蒙特卡罗模拟进行元分析,检查使用混合物模型枚举类别的准确性。
本文介绍了对蒙特卡罗模拟研究进行荟萃分析的步骤。所选的蒙特卡罗模拟研究侧重于混合建模,而混合建模在社会和行为科学领域正变得越来越流行。我们详细介绍了荟萃分析的以下步骤:(a) 提出研究问题;(b) 确定相关文献;(c) 筛选文献;(d) 提取数据;(e) 分析数据;(f) 解释和讨论研究结果。我们的目标是研究在混合建模分析中,哪些模拟设计因素(调节因素)会影响类枚举的准确性。我们使用具有多层次结构的广义线性混合模型分析了元分析数据,并使用元回归模型检验了设计调节因素对相关结果的影响。例如,我们发现贝叶斯信息标准在样本量较大的条件下表现更为准确,而熵在样本量较小的条件下表现更为准确。我们希望这篇文章能为其他人提供指导,以便定量综合蒙特卡罗模拟研究的结果。反过来,对蒙特卡罗模拟研究进行荟萃分析所得出的结果可以提供更多有关影响相关结果的因素的细节,并帮助方法论专家规划蒙特卡罗模拟研究。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA,保留所有权利)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Psychological methods
Psychological methods PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
13.10
自引率
7.10%
发文量
159
期刊介绍: Psychological Methods is devoted to the development and dissemination of methods for collecting, analyzing, understanding, and interpreting psychological data. Its purpose is the dissemination of innovations in research design, measurement, methodology, and quantitative and qualitative analysis to the psychological community; its further purpose is to promote effective communication about related substantive and methodological issues. The audience is expected to be diverse and to include those who develop new procedures, those who are responsible for undergraduate and graduate training in design, measurement, and statistics, as well as those who employ those procedures in research.
期刊最新文献
A guided tutorial on linear mixed-effects models for the analysis of accuracies and response times in experiments with fully crossed design. Bayes factors for logistic (mixed-effect) models. Better power by design: Permuted-subblock randomization boosts power in repeated-measures experiments. Building a simpler moderated nonlinear factor analysis model with Markov Chain Monte Carlo estimation. Definition and identification of causal ratio effects.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1