Matching Items (3)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Quantitative psychology
- Creators: Mackinnon, David P.
Description
Through a two study simulation design with different design conditions (sample size at level 1 (L1) was set to 3, level 2 (L2) sample size ranged from 10 to 75, level 3 (L3) sample size ranged from 30 to 150, intraclass correlation (ICC) ranging from 0.10 to 0.50, model complexity ranging from one predictor to three predictors), this study intends to provide general guidelines about adequate sample sizes at three levels under varying ICC conditions for a viable three level HLM analysis (e.g., reasonably unbiased and accurate parameter estimates). In this study, the data generating parameters for the were obtained using a large-scale longitudinal data set from North Carolina, provided by the National Center on Assessment and Accountability for Special Education (NCAASE). I discuss ranges of sample sizes that are inadequate or adequate for convergence, absolute bias, relative bias, root mean squared error (RMSE), and coverage of individual parameter estimates. The current study, with the help of a detailed two-part simulation design for various sample sizes, model complexity and ICCs, provides various options of adequate sample sizes under different conditions. This study emphasizes that adequate sample sizes at either L1, L2, and L3 can be adjusted according to different interests in parameter estimates, different ranges of acceptable absolute bias, relative bias, root mean squared error, and coverage. Under different model complexity and varying ICC conditions, this study aims to help researchers identify L1, L2, and L3 sample size or both as the source of variation in absolute bias, relative bias, RMSE, or coverage proportions for a certain parameter estimate. This assists researchers in making better decisions for selecting adequate sample sizes in a three-level HLM analysis. A limitation of the study was the use of only a single distribution for the dependent and explanatory variables, different types of distributions and their effects might result in different sample size recommendations.
ContributorsYel, Nedim (Author) / Levy, Roy (Thesis advisor) / Elliott, Stephen N. (Thesis advisor) / Schulte, Ann C (Committee member) / Iida, Masumi (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2016
Description
Time-to-event analysis or equivalently, survival analysis deals with two variables simultaneously: when (time information) an event occurs and whether an event occurrence is observed or not during the observation period (censoring information). In behavioral and social sciences, the event of interest usually does not lead to a terminal state such as death. Other outcomes after the event can be collected and thus, the survival variable can be considered as a predictor as well as an outcome in a study. One example of a case where the survival variable serves as a predictor as well as an outcome is a survival-mediator model. In a single survival-mediator model an independent variable, X predicts a survival variable, M which in turn, predicts a continuous outcome, Y. The survival-mediator model consists of two regression equations: X predicting M (M-regression), and M and X simultaneously predicting Y (Y-regression). To estimate the regression coefficients of the survival-mediator model, Cox regression is used for the M-regression. Ordinary least squares regression is used for the Y-regression using complete case analysis assuming censored data in M are missing completely at random so that the Y-regression is unbiased. In this dissertation research, different measures for the indirect effect were proposed and a simulation study was conducted to compare performance of different indirect effect test methods. Bias-corrected bootstrapping produced high Type I error rates as well as low parameter coverage rates in some conditions. In contrast, the Sobel test produced low Type I error rates as well as high parameter coverage rates in some conditions. The bootstrap of the natural indirect effect produced low Type I error and low statistical power when the censoring proportion was non-zero. Percentile bootstrapping, distribution of the product and the joint-significance test showed best performance. Statistical analysis of the survival-mediator model is discussed. Two indirect effect measures, the ab-product and the natural indirect effect are compared and discussed. Limitations and future directions of the simulation study are discussed. Last, interpretation of the survival-mediator model for a made-up empirical data set is provided to clarify the meaning of the quantities in the survival-mediator model.
ContributorsKim, Han Joe (Author) / Mackinnon, David P. (Thesis advisor) / Tein, Jenn-Yun (Thesis advisor) / West, Stephen G. (Committee member) / Grimm, Kevin J. (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2017
Description
Statistical mediation analysis has been widely used in the social sciences in order to examine the indirect effects of an independent variable on a dependent variable. The statistical properties of the single mediator model with manifest and latent variables have been studied using simulation studies. However, the single mediator model with latent variables in the Bayesian framework with various accurate and inaccurate priors for structural and measurement model parameters has yet to be evaluated in a statistical simulation. This dissertation outlines the steps in the estimation of a single mediator model with latent variables as a Bayesian structural equation model (SEM). A Monte Carlo study is carried out in order to examine the statistical properties of point and interval summaries for the mediated effect in the Bayesian latent variable single mediator model with prior distributions with varying degrees of accuracy and informativeness. Bayesian methods with diffuse priors have equally good statistical properties as Maximum Likelihood (ML) and the distribution of the product. With accurate informative priors Bayesian methods can increase power up to 25% and decrease interval width up to 24%. With inaccurate informative priors the point summaries of the mediated effect are more biased than ML estimates, and the bias is higher if the inaccuracy occurs in priors for structural parameters than in priors for measurement model parameters. Findings from the Monte Carlo study are generalizable to Bayesian analyses with priors of the same distributional forms that have comparable amounts of (in)accuracy and informativeness to priors evaluated in the Monte Carlo study.
ContributorsMiočević, Milica (Author) / Mackinnon, David P. (Thesis advisor) / Levy, Roy (Thesis advisor) / Grimm, Kevin (Committee member) / West, Stephen G. (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2017