纵向研究中模型的力量:来自全交叉模拟设计的发现。

IF 2.2 4区 教育学 Q1 Social Sciences Journal of Experimental Education Pub Date : 2009-04-01 DOI:10.3200/JEXE.77.3.215-254
Hua Fang, Gordon P Brooks, Maria L Rizzo, Kimberly Andrews Espy, Robert S Barcikowski
{"title":"纵向研究中模型的力量:来自全交叉模拟设计的发现。","authors":"Hua Fang,&nbsp;Gordon P Brooks,&nbsp;Maria L Rizzo,&nbsp;Kimberly Andrews Espy,&nbsp;Robert S Barcikowski","doi":"10.3200/JEXE.77.3.215-254","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Because the power properties of traditional repeated measures and hierarchical multivariate linear models have not been clearly determined in the balanced design for longitudinal studies in the literature, the authors present a power comparison study of traditional repeated measures and hierarchical multivariate linear models under 3 variance-covariance structures. The results from a full-crossed simulation design suggest that traditional repeated measures have significantly higher power than do hierarchical multivariate linear models for main effects, but they have significantly lower power for interaction effects in most situations. Significant power differences are also exhibited when power is compared across different covariance structures.</p>","PeriodicalId":47911,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Education","volume":"77 3","pages":"215-254"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2009-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3200/JEXE.77.3.215-254","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Power of Models in Longitudinal Study: Findings From a Full-Crossed Simulation Design.\",\"authors\":\"Hua Fang,&nbsp;Gordon P Brooks,&nbsp;Maria L Rizzo,&nbsp;Kimberly Andrews Espy,&nbsp;Robert S Barcikowski\",\"doi\":\"10.3200/JEXE.77.3.215-254\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Because the power properties of traditional repeated measures and hierarchical multivariate linear models have not been clearly determined in the balanced design for longitudinal studies in the literature, the authors present a power comparison study of traditional repeated measures and hierarchical multivariate linear models under 3 variance-covariance structures. The results from a full-crossed simulation design suggest that traditional repeated measures have significantly higher power than do hierarchical multivariate linear models for main effects, but they have significantly lower power for interaction effects in most situations. Significant power differences are also exhibited when power is compared across different covariance structures.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47911,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Experimental Education\",\"volume\":\"77 3\",\"pages\":\"215-254\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2009-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3200/JEXE.77.3.215-254\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Experimental Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3200/JEXE.77.3.215-254\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3200/JEXE.77.3.215-254","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

由于文献在纵向研究的平衡设计中没有明确传统重复测量和分层多元线性模型的功率特性,作者在3种方差-协方差结构下对传统重复测量和分层多元线性模型进行了功率比较研究。全交叉模拟设计的结果表明,传统的重复测量在主效应方面的功效显著高于分层多元线性模型,但在大多数情况下,它们在交互效应方面的功效明显较低。当跨不同协方差结构比较功率时,也显示出显著的功率差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
Power of Models in Longitudinal Study: Findings From a Full-Crossed Simulation Design.

Because the power properties of traditional repeated measures and hierarchical multivariate linear models have not been clearly determined in the balanced design for longitudinal studies in the literature, the authors present a power comparison study of traditional repeated measures and hierarchical multivariate linear models under 3 variance-covariance structures. The results from a full-crossed simulation design suggest that traditional repeated measures have significantly higher power than do hierarchical multivariate linear models for main effects, but they have significantly lower power for interaction effects in most situations. Significant power differences are also exhibited when power is compared across different covariance structures.

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
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: The Journal of Experimental Education publishes theoretical, laboratory, and classroom research studies that use the range of quantitative and qualitative methodologies. Recent articles have explored the correlation between test preparation and performance, enhancing students" self-efficacy, the effects of peer collaboration among students, and arguments about statistical significance and effect size reporting. In recent issues, JXE has published examinations of statistical methodologies and editorial practices used in several educational research journals.
期刊最新文献
Full-Structured or Supported by Incremental Scaffolds? Effects on Perceived Competence and Motivation Same Classroom, Different Affordances? Demographic Differences in Perceptions of Motivational Climate in Five STEM Courses Newton Makes Me Happy: Cycling Emotions during Science Text Reading Working Memory and Automaticity in Relation to Mental Addition among American Elementary Students Demographic, psychosocial, and medical correlates ofpsychological morbidity after intensive care unit stay.
×
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