Exact bootstrap confidence intervals for regression coefficients in small samples

2017 ◽  
Vol 47 (10) ◽  
pp. 2953-2959 ◽  
Author(s):  
Klairung Samart ◽  
Naratip Jansakul ◽  
Mitchai Chongcheawchamnan
SIMULATION ◽  
1991 ◽  
Vol 56 (2) ◽  
pp. 119-127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Krishnamurty Muralidhar ◽  
Gary Adna Ames ◽  
Rathindra Sarathy

Marketing ZFP ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 41 (4) ◽  
pp. 33-42
Author(s):  
Thomas Otter

Empirical research in marketing often is, at least in parts, exploratory. The goal of exploratory research, by definition, extends beyond the empirical calibration of parameters in well established models and includes the empirical assessment of different model specifications. In this context researchers often rely on the statistical information about parameters in a given model to learn about likely model structures. An example is the search for the 'true' set of covariates in a regression model based on confidence intervals of regression coefficients. The purpose of this paper is to illustrate and compare different measures of statistical information about model parameters in the context of a generalized linear model: classical confidence intervals, bootstrapped confidence intervals, and Bayesian posterior credible intervals from a model that adapts its dimensionality as a function of the information in the data. I find that inference from the adaptive Bayesian model dominates that based on classical and bootstrapped intervals in a given model.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amanda Kay Montoya ◽  
Andrew F. Hayes

Researchers interested in testing mediation often use designs where participants are measured on a dependent variable Y and a mediator M in both of two different circumstances. The dominant approach to assessing mediation in such a design, proposed by Judd, Kenny, and McClelland (2001), relies on a series of hypothesis tests about components of the mediation model and is not based on an estimate of or formal inference about the indirect effect. In this paper we recast Judd et al.’s approach in the path-analytic framework that is now commonly used in between-participant mediation analysis. By so doing, it is apparent how to estimate the indirect effect of a within-participant manipulation on some outcome through a mediator as the product of paths of influence. This path analytic approach eliminates the need for discrete hypothesis tests about components of the model to support a claim of mediation, as Judd et al’s method requires, because it relies only on an inference about the product of paths— the indirect effect. We generalize methods of inference for the indirect effect widely used in between-participant designs to this within-participant version of mediation analysis, including bootstrap confidence intervals and Monte Carlo confidence intervals. Using this path analytic approach, we extend the method to models with multiple mediators operating in parallel and serially and discuss the comparison of indirect effects in these more complex models. We offer macros and code for SPSS, SAS, and Mplus that conduct these analyses.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document