异方差多水平模型的精确标准误差:一种计算效率更高的折刀技术

Psych Pub Date : 2023-07-21 DOI:10.3390/psych5030049
Steffen Zitzmann, Sebastian Weirich, Martin Hecht
{"title":"异方差多水平模型的精确标准误差:一种计算效率更高的折刀技术","authors":"Steffen Zitzmann, Sebastian Weirich, Martin Hecht","doi":"10.3390/psych5030049","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In random-effects models, hierarchical linear models, or multilevel models, it is typically assumed that the variances within higher-level units are homoscedastic, meaning that they are equal across these units. However, this assumption is often violated in research. Depending on the degree of violation, this can lead to biased standard errors of higher-level parameters and thus to incorrect inferences. In this article, we describe a resampling technique for obtaining standard errors—Zitzmann’s jackknife. We conducted a Monte Carlo simulation study to compare the technique with the commonly used delete-1 jackknife, the robust standard error in Mplus, and a modified version of the commonly used delete-1 jackknife. Findings revealed that the resampling techniques clearly outperformed the robust standard error in rather small samples with high levels of heteroscedasticity. Moreover, Zitzmann’s jackknife tended to perform somewhat better than the two versions of the delete-1 jackknife and was much faster.","PeriodicalId":93139,"journal":{"name":"Psych","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Accurate Standard Errors in Multilevel Modeling with Heteroscedasticity: A Computationally More Efficient Jackknife Technique\",\"authors\":\"Steffen Zitzmann, Sebastian Weirich, Martin Hecht\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/psych5030049\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In random-effects models, hierarchical linear models, or multilevel models, it is typically assumed that the variances within higher-level units are homoscedastic, meaning that they are equal across these units. However, this assumption is often violated in research. Depending on the degree of violation, this can lead to biased standard errors of higher-level parameters and thus to incorrect inferences. In this article, we describe a resampling technique for obtaining standard errors—Zitzmann’s jackknife. We conducted a Monte Carlo simulation study to compare the technique with the commonly used delete-1 jackknife, the robust standard error in Mplus, and a modified version of the commonly used delete-1 jackknife. Findings revealed that the resampling techniques clearly outperformed the robust standard error in rather small samples with high levels of heteroscedasticity. Moreover, Zitzmann’s jackknife tended to perform somewhat better than the two versions of the delete-1 jackknife and was much faster.\",\"PeriodicalId\":93139,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psych\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psych\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/psych5030049\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psych","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/psych5030049","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

在随机效应模型、层次线性模型或多层模型中,通常假设高层单元内的方差是同方差的,这意味着它们在这些单元之间是相等的。然而,这一假设在研究中经常被违背。根据违反的程度,这可能导致更高级别参数的偏差标准误差,从而导致不正确的推断。在这篇文章中,我们描述了一种获得标准误差的重采样技术——齐兹曼折刀。我们进行了蒙特卡罗模拟研究,将该技术与常用的delete-1折刀、Mplus中的鲁棒标准误差以及常用的delete-1折刀的改进版本进行了比较。研究结果表明,在具有高水平异方差的相当小的样本中,重采样技术明显优于稳健的标准误差。此外,Zitzmann的折刀比两个版本的delete-1折刀表现得更好,速度也快得多。
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
Accurate Standard Errors in Multilevel Modeling with Heteroscedasticity: A Computationally More Efficient Jackknife Technique
In random-effects models, hierarchical linear models, or multilevel models, it is typically assumed that the variances within higher-level units are homoscedastic, meaning that they are equal across these units. However, this assumption is often violated in research. Depending on the degree of violation, this can lead to biased standard errors of higher-level parameters and thus to incorrect inferences. In this article, we describe a resampling technique for obtaining standard errors—Zitzmann’s jackknife. We conducted a Monte Carlo simulation study to compare the technique with the commonly used delete-1 jackknife, the robust standard error in Mplus, and a modified version of the commonly used delete-1 jackknife. Findings revealed that the resampling techniques clearly outperformed the robust standard error in rather small samples with high levels of heteroscedasticity. Moreover, Zitzmann’s jackknife tended to perform somewhat better than the two versions of the delete-1 jackknife and was much faster.
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
A Robust Indicator Mean-Based Method for Estimating Generalizability Theory Absolute Error and Related Dependability Indices within Structural Equation Modeling Frameworks Qualitative Pilot Interventions for the Enhancement of Mental Health Support in Doctoral Students Walking Forward Together—The Next Step: Indigenous Youth Mental Health and the Climate Crisis Walking Forward Together—The Next Step: Indigenous Youth Mental Health and the Climate Crisis The IADC Grief Questionnaire as a Brief Measure for Complicated Grief in Clinical Practice and Research: A Preliminary Study
×
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