scholarly journals Stepwise methods can limit power for hypothesis tests of cross-level interactions

Author(s):  
Kevin Michael King ◽  
Dale S. Kim ◽  
Connor McCabe ◽  
Sean P. Lane

In multilevel models, stepwise methods are commonly used to test cross-level interactions, where a cluster level variable explains differences in the effect of an observation level variable on the outcome.Researchers often wish to establish that there is between cluster variance in slopes before testing whether an observed cluster level variable explains between cluster variance in slopes.In the stepwise method, between cluster slope variance (i.e. random slopes) is required before a cross-level interaction is tested.We argue that this requirement unnecessarily reduces the power to detect true cross-level interactions, because it imposes an unnecessary constraint on the power to detect valid interactions.In short, the stepwise approach would only be valid if, in the same data, the stepwise approach always identifies true interactions that are also identified by a direct test of the interaction model. Using Monte Carlo simulations, we demonstrate that this is not the case.The power to detect a true interaction was especially low when the residual slope variance (i.e. variance unexplained by the interaction), the variance of the moderator, the number of observations per cluster, or the number of clusters was small.We recommend that researchers directly test interactions that are of interest, regardless of the presence of random slope variance.

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan Paul Heisig ◽  
Merlin Schaeffer

Mixed effects multilevel models are often used to investigate cross-level interactions, a specific type of context effect that may be understood as an upper-level variable moderating the association between a lower-level predictor and the outcome. We argue that multilevel models involving cross-level interactions should always include random slopes on the lower-level components of those interactions. Failure to do so will usually result in severely anti-conservative statistical inference. Monte Carlo simulations and illustrative empirical analyses highlight the practical relevance of the issue. Using European Social Survey data, we examine a total 30 cross-level interactions. Introducing a random slope term on the lower-level variable involved in a cross-level interaction, reduces the absolute t-ratio by 31% or more in three quarters of cases, with an average reduction of 42%. Many practitioners seem to be unaware of these issues. Roughly half of the cross-level interaction estimates published in the European Sociological Review between 2011 and 2016 are based on models that omit the crucial random slope term. Detailed analysis of the associated test statistics suggests that many of the estimates would not meet conventional standards of statistical significance if estimated using the correct specification. This raises the question how much robust evidence of cross-level interactions sociology has actually produced over the past decades.


2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 288-311 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lesa Hoffman

The increasing availability of software with which to estimate multivariate multilevel models (also called multilevel structural equation models) makes it easier than ever before to leverage these powerful techniques to answer research questions at multiple levels of analysis simultaneously. However, interpretation can be tricky given that different choices for centering model predictors can lead to different versions of what appear to be the same parameters; this is especially the case when the predictors are latent variables created through model-estimated variance components. A further complication is a recent change to Mplus (Version 8.1), a popular software program for estimating multivariate multilevel models, in which the selection of Bayesian estimation instead of maximum likelihood results in different lower-level predictors when random slopes are requested. This article provides a detailed explication of how the parameters of multilevel models differ as a function of the analyst’s decisions regarding centering and the form of lower-level predictors (i.e., observed or latent), the method of estimation, and the variant of program syntax used. After explaining how different methods of centering lower-level observed predictor variables result in different higher-level effects within univariate multilevel models, this article uses simulated data to demonstrate how these same concepts apply in specifying multivariate multilevel models with latent lower-level predictor variables. Complete data, input, and output files for all of the example models have been made available online to further aid readers in accurately translating these central tenets of multivariate multilevel modeling into practice.


2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (24) ◽  
pp. 448
Author(s):  
Loai M. A. Al-Zou’bi ◽  
Amer I. Al-Omari ◽  
Ahmad M. Al-Khazalah ◽  
Raed A. Alzghool

Multilevel models can be used to account for clustering in data from multi-stage surveys. In some cases, the intra-cluster correlation may be close to zero, so that it may seem reasonable to ignore clustering and fit a single level model. This article proposes several adaptive strategies for allowing for clustering in regression analysis of multi-stage survey data. The approach is based on testing whether the cluster-level variance component is zero. If this hypothesis is retained, then variance estimates are calculated ignoring clustering; otherwise, clustering is reflected in variance estimation. A simple simulation study is used to evaluate the various procedures.


2016 ◽  
Vol 78 (2) ◽  
pp. 297-318 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francis L. Huang

Cluster randomized trials involving participants nested within intact treatment and control groups are commonly performed in various educational, psychological, and biomedical studies. However, recruiting and retaining intact groups present various practical, financial, and logistical challenges to evaluators and often, cluster randomized trials are performed with a low number of clusters (~20 groups). Although multilevel models are often used to analyze nested data, researchers may be concerned of potentially biased results due to having only a few groups under study. Cluster bootstrapping has been suggested as an alternative procedure when analyzing clustered data though it has seen very little use in educational and psychological studies. Using a Monte Carlo simulation that varied the number of clusters, average cluster size, and intraclass correlations, we compared standard errors using cluster bootstrapping with those derived using ordinary least squares regression and multilevel models. Results indicate that cluster bootstrapping, though more computationally demanding, can be used as an alternative procedure for the analysis of clustered data when treatment effects at the group level are of primary interest. Supplementary material showing how to perform cluster bootstrapped regressions using R is also provided.


2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
NATASHA FOGAÇA ◽  
FRANCISCO A. COELHO JUNIOR ◽  
TATIANE PASCHOAL ◽  
MARIO C. FERREIRA ◽  
CAMILA C. TORRES

ABSTRACT Purpose: This research was based on the "happy, productive worker" hypothesis. The objective was to analyze the predictive relationships, through a multilevel approach, between the variables well-being at work, organizational justice, organizational support, and the dependent variable individual job performance. Originality/value: The multilevel study of individual job performance and its relations with well-being and organizational variables are still a current gap in the literature, as well as the possibility of testing whether well-being at work can be considered a collective phenomenon. The presence of organizational support in the model, operationalized at the team level, represents an important contribution to the development of theories focused on teams' roles in organizations, especially their impact on organizational variables. Design/methodology/approach: Considering the proposed analysis at two different levels, a multilevel design model was adopted. The final sample consisted of 730 individuals and 32 units. The data were collected through a questionnaire composed of four previously validated scales. Data analysis followed the six steps proposed by Hox, Moerbeek, and Schoot (2017) for multilevel models for each of the samples. Findings: The explanatory model presented a predictive relationship between achievement (well-being at work factor), operationalized as an individual-level variable, and individual job performance; a predictive relationship between interactional justice, also operationalized as an individual-level variable, and individual job performance, and a predictive relationship between collective perceptions of organizational support, operationalized as a team-level variable, and individual job performance.


Psychometrika ◽  
2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anders Skrondal ◽  
Sophia Rabe-Hesketh

AbstractIn psychometrics, the canonical use of conditional likelihoods is for the Rasch model in measurement. Whilst not disputing the utility of conditional likelihoods in measurement, we examine a broader class of problems in psychometrics that can be addressed via conditional likelihoods. Specifically, we consider cluster-level endogeneity where the standard assumption that observed explanatory variables are independent from latent variables is violated. Here, “cluster” refers to the entity characterized by latent variables or random effects, such as individuals in measurement models or schools in multilevel models and “unit” refers to the elementary entity such as an item in measurement. Cluster-level endogeneity problems can arise in a number of settings, including unobserved confounding of causal effects, measurement error, retrospective sampling, informative cluster sizes, missing data, and heteroskedasticity. Severely inconsistent estimation can result if these challenges are ignored.


2014 ◽  
Vol 39 (6) ◽  
pp. 524-549 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael David Bates ◽  
Katherine E. Castellano ◽  
Sophia Rabe-Hesketh ◽  
Anders Skrondal

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Moonseong Heo ◽  
Singh R. Nair ◽  
Judith Wylie-Rosett ◽  
Myles S. Faith ◽  
Angelo Pietrobelli ◽  
...  

Objective. To evaluate whether clustering effects, often quantified by the intracluster correlation coefficient (ICC), were appropriately accounted for in design and analysis of school-based trials. Methods. We searched PubMed and extracted variables concerning study characteristics, power analysis, ICC use for power analysis, applied statistical models, and the report of the ICC estimated from the observed data. Results. N=263 papers were identified, and N=121 papers were included for evaluation. Overall, only a minority (21.5%) of studies incorporated ICC values for power analysis, fewer studies (8.3%) reported the estimated ICC, and 68.6% of studies applied appropriate multilevel models. A greater proportion of studies applied the appropriate models during the past five years (2013–2017) compared to the prior years (74.1% versus 63.5%, p=0.176). Significantly associated with application of appropriate models were a larger number of schools (p=0.030), a larger sample size (p=0.002), longer follow-up (p=0.014), and randomization at a cluster level (p<0.001) and so were studies that incorporated the ICC into power analysis (p=0.016) and reported the estimated ICC (p=0.030). Conclusion. Although application of appropriate models has increased over the years, consideration of clustering effects in power analysis has been inadequate, as has report of estimated ICC. To increase rigor, future school-based trials should address these issues at both the design and analysis stages.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document