固定与随机效应模型的选择:教育研究的一些思考

Paul Clarke, Claire Crawford, Fiona Steele, A. Vignoles
{"title":"固定与随机效应模型的选择:教育研究的一些思考","authors":"Paul Clarke, Claire Crawford, Fiona Steele, A. Vignoles","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1700456","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We discuss the use of fixed and random effects models in the context of educational research and set out the assumptions behind the two modelling approaches. To illustrate the issues that should be considered when choosing between these approaches, we analyse the determinants of pupil achievement in primary school, using data from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children. We conclude that a fixed effects approach will be preferable in scenarios where the primary interest is in policy-relevant inference about the effects of individual characteristics, but the process through which pupils are selected into schools is poorly understood or the data are too limited to adjust for the effects of selection. In this context, the robustness of the fixed effects approach to the random effects assumption is attractive, and educational researchers should consider using it, even if only to assess the robustness of estimates obtained from random effects models. On the other hand, when the selection mechanism is fairly well understood and the researcher has access to rich data, the random effects model should naturally be preferred because it can produce policy-relevant estimates while allowing a wider range of research questions to be addressed. Moreover, random effects estimators of regression coefficients and shrinkage estimators of school effects are more statistically efficient than those for fixed effects.","PeriodicalId":384078,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Other Econometrics: Data Collection & Data Estimation Methodology (Topic)","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"116","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Choice Between Fixed and Random Effects Models: Some Considerations for Educational Research\",\"authors\":\"Paul Clarke, Claire Crawford, Fiona Steele, A. Vignoles\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.1700456\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We discuss the use of fixed and random effects models in the context of educational research and set out the assumptions behind the two modelling approaches. To illustrate the issues that should be considered when choosing between these approaches, we analyse the determinants of pupil achievement in primary school, using data from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children. We conclude that a fixed effects approach will be preferable in scenarios where the primary interest is in policy-relevant inference about the effects of individual characteristics, but the process through which pupils are selected into schools is poorly understood or the data are too limited to adjust for the effects of selection. In this context, the robustness of the fixed effects approach to the random effects assumption is attractive, and educational researchers should consider using it, even if only to assess the robustness of estimates obtained from random effects models. On the other hand, when the selection mechanism is fairly well understood and the researcher has access to rich data, the random effects model should naturally be preferred because it can produce policy-relevant estimates while allowing a wider range of research questions to be addressed. Moreover, random effects estimators of regression coefficients and shrinkage estimators of school effects are more statistically efficient than those for fixed effects.\",\"PeriodicalId\":384078,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ERN: Other Econometrics: Data Collection & Data Estimation Methodology (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2010-06-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"116\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ERN: Other Econometrics: Data Collection & Data Estimation Methodology (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1700456\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERN: Other Econometrics: Data Collection & Data Estimation Methodology (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1700456","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 116

摘要

我们讨论了固定效应和随机效应模型在教育研究中的应用,并提出了这两种建模方法背后的假设。为了说明在这些方法之间进行选择时应该考虑的问题,我们分析了小学学生成绩的决定因素,使用了雅芳父母和儿童纵向研究的数据。我们得出的结论是,固定效应方法在以下情况下更可取:主要兴趣是对个人特征影响的政策相关推断,但学生被选入学校的过程知之甚少,或者数据太有限,无法根据选择的影响进行调整。在这种情况下,固定效应方法对随机效应假设的稳健性是有吸引力的,教育研究人员应该考虑使用它,即使只是评估从随机效应模型中获得的估计的稳健性。另一方面,当选择机制被很好地理解并且研究人员可以获得丰富的数据时,随机效应模型自然应该被首选,因为它可以产生与政策相关的估计,同时允许更广泛的研究问题得到解决。此外,回归系数的随机效应估计和学校效应的收缩估计比固定效应的统计效率更高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The Choice Between Fixed and Random Effects Models: Some Considerations for Educational Research
We discuss the use of fixed and random effects models in the context of educational research and set out the assumptions behind the two modelling approaches. To illustrate the issues that should be considered when choosing between these approaches, we analyse the determinants of pupil achievement in primary school, using data from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children. We conclude that a fixed effects approach will be preferable in scenarios where the primary interest is in policy-relevant inference about the effects of individual characteristics, but the process through which pupils are selected into schools is poorly understood or the data are too limited to adjust for the effects of selection. In this context, the robustness of the fixed effects approach to the random effects assumption is attractive, and educational researchers should consider using it, even if only to assess the robustness of estimates obtained from random effects models. On the other hand, when the selection mechanism is fairly well understood and the researcher has access to rich data, the random effects model should naturally be preferred because it can produce policy-relevant estimates while allowing a wider range of research questions to be addressed. Moreover, random effects estimators of regression coefficients and shrinkage estimators of school effects are more statistically efficient than those for fixed effects.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Structural Estimation Combining Micro and Macro Data Monetary Policy under Data Uncertainty: Interest-Rate Smoothing from a Cross-Country Perspective Nudging Towards Data Equity: The Role of Stewardship and Fiduciaries in the Digital Economy Re-Engineering Key National Economic Indicators Quant Research Ideas to Test for ETF Option and Equity Markets in China and Japan
×
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