On the Common but Problematic Specification of Conflated Random Slopes in Multilevel Models.

IF 5.3 3区 心理学 Q1 MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS Multivariate Behavioral Research Pub Date : 2023-11-01 Epub Date: 2023-04-10 DOI:10.1080/00273171.2023.2174490
Jason D Rights, Sonya K Sterba
{"title":"On the Common but Problematic Specification of Conflated Random Slopes in Multilevel Models.","authors":"Jason D Rights, Sonya K Sterba","doi":"10.1080/00273171.2023.2174490","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>For multilevel models (MLMs) with fixed slopes, it has been widely recognized that a level-1 variable can have distinct between-cluster and within-cluster fixed effects, and that failing to disaggregate these effects yields a conflated, uninterpretable fixed effect. For MLMs with random slopes, however, we clarify that two different types of slope conflation can occur: that of the fixed component (termed fixed conflation) and that of the random component (termed random conflation). The latter is rarely recognized and not well understood. Here we explain that a model commonly used to disaggregate the fixed component-the contextual effect model with random slopes-troublingly still yields a conflated random component. Negative consequences of such random conflation have not been demonstrated. Here we show that they include erroneous interpretation and inferences about the substantively important extent of between-cluster differences in slopes, including either underestimating or overestimating such slope heterogeneity. Furthermore, we show that this random conflation can yield inappropriate standard errors for fixed effects. To aid researchers in practice, we delineate which types of random slope specifications yield an unconflated random component. We demonstrate the advantages of these unconflated models in terms of estimating and testing random slope variance (i.e., improved power, Type I error, and bias) and in terms of standard error estimation for fixed effects (i.e., more accurate standard errors), and make recommendations for which specifications to use for particular research purposes.</p>","PeriodicalId":53155,"journal":{"name":"Multivariate Behavioral Research","volume":" ","pages":"1106-1133"},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Multivariate Behavioral Research","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2023.2174490","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/4/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

For multilevel models (MLMs) with fixed slopes, it has been widely recognized that a level-1 variable can have distinct between-cluster and within-cluster fixed effects, and that failing to disaggregate these effects yields a conflated, uninterpretable fixed effect. For MLMs with random slopes, however, we clarify that two different types of slope conflation can occur: that of the fixed component (termed fixed conflation) and that of the random component (termed random conflation). The latter is rarely recognized and not well understood. Here we explain that a model commonly used to disaggregate the fixed component-the contextual effect model with random slopes-troublingly still yields a conflated random component. Negative consequences of such random conflation have not been demonstrated. Here we show that they include erroneous interpretation and inferences about the substantively important extent of between-cluster differences in slopes, including either underestimating or overestimating such slope heterogeneity. Furthermore, we show that this random conflation can yield inappropriate standard errors for fixed effects. To aid researchers in practice, we delineate which types of random slope specifications yield an unconflated random component. We demonstrate the advantages of these unconflated models in terms of estimating and testing random slope variance (i.e., improved power, Type I error, and bias) and in terms of standard error estimation for fixed effects (i.e., more accurate standard errors), and make recommendations for which specifications to use for particular research purposes.

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
论多层次模型中常见但有问题的串联随机斜率规范。
对于具有固定斜率的多层次模型(MLMs)来说,人们普遍认为第一层次变量可能具有明显的群间固定效应和群内固定效应,如果不对这些效应进行分解,就会产生混淆的、难以解释的固定效应。然而,对于具有随机斜率的多变量模型,我们要澄清的是,可能会出现两种不同类型的斜率混淆:固定分量的斜率混淆(称为固定混淆)和随机分量的斜率混淆(称为随机混淆)。后者很少被认识到,也没有得到很好的理解。在这里,我们解释了一个常用于分解固定成分的模型--具有随机斜率的背景效应模型--令人不安的是,它仍然会产生混淆的随机成分。这种随机混淆的负面影响尚未得到证实。在这里,我们将证明这些负面影响包括对群组间斜率差异的重要程度的错误解释和推断,包括低估或高估这种斜率异质性。此外,我们还表明,这种随机混淆会产生不恰当的固定效应标准误差。为了在实践中帮助研究人员,我们划分了哪些类型的随机斜率规范会产生非膨胀随机成分。我们展示了这些非膨胀模型在估计和检验随机斜率方差(即改进的功率、I 类误差和偏差)以及固定效应的标准误差估计(即更准确的标准误差)方面的优势,并就特定研究目的使用哪种规范提出了建议。
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
Multivariate Behavioral Research
Multivariate Behavioral Research 数学-数学跨学科应用
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
2.60%
发文量
49
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Multivariate Behavioral Research (MBR) publishes a variety of substantive, methodological, and theoretical articles in all areas of the social and behavioral sciences. Most MBR articles fall into one of two categories. Substantive articles report on applications of sophisticated multivariate research methods to study topics of substantive interest in personality, health, intelligence, industrial/organizational, and other behavioral science areas. Methodological articles present and/or evaluate new developments in multivariate methods, or address methodological issues in current research. We also encourage submission of integrative articles related to pedagogy involving multivariate research methods, and to historical treatments of interest and relevance to multivariate research methods.
期刊最新文献
Latently Mediating: A Bayesian Take on Causal Mediation Analysis with Structured Survey Data. Quantifying Evidence for-and against-Granger Causality with Bayes Factors. Person Specific Parameter Heterogeneity in the 2PL IRT Model. Environment-by-PGS Interaction in the Classical Twin Design: An Application to Childhood Anxiety and Negative Affect. Homogeneity Assumptions in the Analysis of Dynamic Processes.
×
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