标准化回归系数之差的置信区间。

IF 5.3 3区 心理学 Q1 MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS Multivariate Behavioral Research Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-04-01 DOI:10.1080/00273171.2024.2318784
Samantha F Anderson
{"title":"标准化回归系数之差的置信区间。","authors":"Samantha F Anderson","doi":"10.1080/00273171.2024.2318784","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Researchers are often interested in comparing predictors, a practice commonly done <i>via</i> informal comparisons of standardized regression slopes. However, formal interval-based approaches offer advantages over informal comparison. Specifically, this article examines a delta-method-based confidence interval for the difference between two standardized regression coefficients, building upon previous work on confidence intervals for single coefficients. Using Monte Carlo simulation studies, the proposed approach is evaluated at finite sample sizes with respect to coverage rate, interval width, Type I error rate, and statistical power under a variety of conditions, and is shown to outperform an alternative approach that uses the standard covariance matrix found in regression textbooks. Additional simulations evaluate current software implementations, small sample performance, and multiple comparison procedures for simultaneously testing multiple differences of interest. Guidance on sample size planning for narrow confidence intervals, an R function to conduct the proposed method, and two empirical demonstrations are provided. The goal is to offer researchers a different tool in their toolbox for when comparisons among standardized coefficients are desired, as a supplement to, rather than a replacement for, other potentially useful analyses.</p>","PeriodicalId":53155,"journal":{"name":"Multivariate Behavioral Research","volume":" ","pages":"758-780"},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Confidence Interval for the Difference Between Standardized Regression Coefficients.\",\"authors\":\"Samantha F Anderson\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00273171.2024.2318784\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Researchers are often interested in comparing predictors, a practice commonly done <i>via</i> informal comparisons of standardized regression slopes. However, formal interval-based approaches offer advantages over informal comparison. Specifically, this article examines a delta-method-based confidence interval for the difference between two standardized regression coefficients, building upon previous work on confidence intervals for single coefficients. Using Monte Carlo simulation studies, the proposed approach is evaluated at finite sample sizes with respect to coverage rate, interval width, Type I error rate, and statistical power under a variety of conditions, and is shown to outperform an alternative approach that uses the standard covariance matrix found in regression textbooks. Additional simulations evaluate current software implementations, small sample performance, and multiple comparison procedures for simultaneously testing multiple differences of interest. Guidance on sample size planning for narrow confidence intervals, an R function to conduct the proposed method, and two empirical demonstrations are provided. The goal is to offer researchers a different tool in their toolbox for when comparisons among standardized coefficients are desired, as a supplement to, rather than a replacement for, other potentially useful analyses.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":53155,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Multivariate Behavioral Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"758-780\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Multivariate Behavioral Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2024.2318784\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/4/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Multivariate Behavioral Research","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2024.2318784","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/4/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究人员通常对比较预测因子感兴趣,这种做法通常是通过标准化回归斜率的非正式比较来实现的。然而,与非正式比较相比,基于正式区间的方法更具优势。具体来说,本文在以往研究单一系数置信区间的基础上,研究了基于 delta 方法的两个标准化回归系数之差的置信区间。通过蒙特卡罗模拟研究,在有限样本量下对所提出的方法进行了覆盖率、区间宽度、I 类错误率和各种条件下的统计能力评估,结果表明该方法优于使用回归教科书中标准协方差矩阵的替代方法。其他模拟还评估了当前的软件实施、小样本性能以及同时测试多个相关差异的多重比较程序。此外,还提供了针对窄置信区间的样本量规划指导、用于执行建议方法的 R 函数以及两个经验演示。我们的目标是为研究人员提供一个不同的工具箱,以便在需要比较标准化系数时,作为其他潜在有用分析的补充而不是替代。
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
A Confidence Interval for the Difference Between Standardized Regression Coefficients.

Researchers are often interested in comparing predictors, a practice commonly done via informal comparisons of standardized regression slopes. However, formal interval-based approaches offer advantages over informal comparison. Specifically, this article examines a delta-method-based confidence interval for the difference between two standardized regression coefficients, building upon previous work on confidence intervals for single coefficients. Using Monte Carlo simulation studies, the proposed approach is evaluated at finite sample sizes with respect to coverage rate, interval width, Type I error rate, and statistical power under a variety of conditions, and is shown to outperform an alternative approach that uses the standard covariance matrix found in regression textbooks. Additional simulations evaluate current software implementations, small sample performance, and multiple comparison procedures for simultaneously testing multiple differences of interest. Guidance on sample size planning for narrow confidence intervals, an R function to conduct the proposed method, and two empirical demonstrations are provided. The goal is to offer researchers a different tool in their toolbox for when comparisons among standardized coefficients are desired, as a supplement to, rather than a replacement for, other potentially useful analyses.

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
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