Matching Items (25)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Statistics
- Creators: McCulloch, Robert
- Creators: Levy, Roy
Description
Dimensionality assessment is an important component of evaluating item response data. Existing approaches to evaluating common assumptions of unidimensionality, such as DIMTEST (Nandakumar & Stout, 1993; Stout, 1987; Stout, Froelich, & Gao, 2001), have been shown to work well under large-scale assessment conditions (e.g., large sample sizes and item pools; see e.g., Froelich & Habing, 2007). It remains to be seen how such procedures perform in the context of small-scale assessments characterized by relatively small sample sizes and/or short tests. The fact that some procedures come with minimum allowable values for characteristics of the data, such as the number of items, may even render them unusable for some small-scale assessments. Other measures designed to assess dimensionality do not come with such limitations and, as such, may perform better under conditions that do not lend themselves to evaluation via statistics that rely on asymptotic theory. The current work aimed to evaluate the performance of one such metric, the standardized generalized dimensionality discrepancy measure (SGDDM; Levy & Svetina, 2011; Levy, Xu, Yel, & Svetina, 2012), under both large- and small-scale testing conditions. A Monte Carlo study was conducted to compare the performance of DIMTEST and the SGDDM statistic in terms of evaluating assumptions of unidimensionality in item response data under a variety of conditions, with an emphasis on the examination of these procedures in small-scale assessments. Similar to previous research, increases in either test length or sample size resulted in increased power. The DIMTEST procedure appeared to be a conservative test of the null hypothesis of unidimensionality. The SGDDM statistic exhibited rejection rates near the nominal rate of .05 under unidimensional conditions, though the reliability of these results may have been less than optimal due to high sampling variability resulting from a relatively limited number of replications. Power values were at or near 1.0 for many of the multidimensional conditions. It was only when the sample size was reduced to N = 100 that the two approaches diverged in performance. Results suggested that both procedures may be appropriate for sample sizes as low as N = 250 and tests as short as J = 12 (SGDDM) or J = 19 (DIMTEST). When used as a diagnostic tool, SGDDM may be appropriate with as few as N = 100 cases combined with J = 12 items. The study was somewhat limited in that it did not include any complex factorial designs, nor were the strength of item discrimination parameters or correlation between factors manipulated. It is recommended that further research be conducted with the inclusion of these factors, as well as an increase in the number of replications when using the SGDDM procedure.
ContributorsReichenberg, Ray E (Author) / Levy, Roy (Thesis advisor) / Thompson, Marilyn S. (Thesis advisor) / Green, Samuel B. (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2013
Description
This simulation study compared the utility of various discrepancy measures within a posterior predictive model checking (PPMC) framework for detecting different types of data-model misfit in multidimensional Bayesian network (BN) models. The investigated conditions were motivated by an applied research program utilizing an operational complex performance assessment within a digital-simulation educational context grounded in theories of cognition and learning. BN models were manipulated along two factors: latent variable dependency structure and number of latent classes. Distributions of posterior predicted p-values (PPP-values) served as the primary outcome measure and were summarized in graphical presentations, by median values across replications, and by proportions of replications in which the PPP-values were extreme. An effect size measure for PPMC was introduced as a supplemental numerical summary to the PPP-value. Consistent with previous PPMC research, all investigated fit functions tended to perform conservatively, but Standardized Generalized Dimensionality Discrepancy Measure (SGDDM), Yen's Q3, and Hierarchy Consistency Index (HCI) only mildly so. Adequate power to detect at least some types of misfit was demonstrated by SGDDM, Q3, HCI, Item Consistency Index (ICI), and to a lesser extent Deviance, while proportion correct (PC), a chi-square-type item-fit measure, Ranked Probability Score (RPS), and Good's Logarithmic Scale (GLS) were powerless across all investigated factors. Bivariate SGDDM and Q3 were found to provide powerful and detailed feedback for all investigated types of misfit.
ContributorsCrawford, Aaron (Author) / Levy, Roy (Thesis advisor) / Green, Samuel (Committee member) / Thompson, Marilyn (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2014
Description
Missing data are common in psychology research and can lead to bias and reduced power if not properly handled. Multiple imputation is a state-of-the-art missing data method recommended by methodologists. Multiple imputation methods can generally be divided into two broad categories: joint model (JM) imputation and fully conditional specification (FCS) imputation. JM draws missing values simultaneously for all incomplete variables using a multivariate distribution (e.g., multivariate normal). FCS, on the other hand, imputes variables one at a time, drawing missing values from a series of univariate distributions. In the single-level context, these two approaches have been shown to be equivalent with multivariate normal data. However, less is known about the similarities and differences of these two approaches with multilevel data, and the methodological literature provides no insight into the situations under which the approaches would produce identical results. This document examined five multilevel multiple imputation approaches (three JM methods and two FCS methods) that have been proposed in the literature. An analytic section shows that only two of the methods (one JM method and one FCS method) used imputation models equivalent to a two-level joint population model that contained random intercepts and different associations across levels. The other three methods employed imputation models that differed from the population model primarily in their ability to preserve distinct level-1 and level-2 covariances. I verified the analytic work with computer simulations, and the simulation results also showed that imputation models that failed to preserve level-specific covariances produced biased estimates. The studies also highlighted conditions that exacerbated the amount of bias produced (e.g., bias was greater for conditions with small cluster sizes). The analytic work and simulations lead to a number of practical recommendations for researchers.
ContributorsMistler, Stephen (Author) / Enders, Craig K. (Thesis advisor) / Aiken, Leona (Committee member) / Levy, Roy (Committee member) / West, Stephen G. (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015
Description
Many methodological approaches have been utilized to predict student retention and persistence over the years, yet few have utilized a Bayesian framework. It is believed this is due in part to the absence of an established process for guiding educational researchers reared in a frequentist perspective into the realms of Bayesian analysis and educational data mining. The current study aimed to address this by providing a model-building process for developing a Bayesian network (BN) that leveraged educational data mining, Bayesian analysis, and traditional iterative model-building techniques in order to predict whether community college students will stop out at the completion of each of their first six terms. The study utilized exploratory and confirmatory techniques to reduce an initial pool of more than 50 potential predictor variables to a parsimonious final BN with only four predictor variables. The average in-sample classification accuracy rate for the model was 80% (Cohen's κ = 53%). The model was shown to be generalizable across samples with an average out-of-sample classification accuracy rate of 78% (Cohen's κ = 49%). The classification rates for the BN were also found to be superior to the classification rates produced by an analog frequentist discrete-time survival analysis model.
ContributorsArcuria, Philip (Author) / Levy, Roy (Thesis advisor) / Green, Samuel B (Committee member) / Thompson, Marilyn S (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015
Description
The primary objective in time series analysis is forecasting. Raw data often exhibits nonstationary behavior: trends, seasonal cycles, and heteroskedasticity. After data is transformed to a weakly stationary process, autoregressive moving average (ARMA) models may capture the remaining temporal dynamics to improve forecasting. Estimation of ARMA can be performed through regressing current values on previous realizations and proxy innovations. The classic paradigm fails when dynamics are nonlinear; in this case, parametric, regime-switching specifications model changes in level, ARMA dynamics, and volatility, using a finite number of latent states. If the states can be identified using past endogenous or exogenous information, a threshold autoregressive (TAR) or logistic smooth transition autoregressive (LSTAR) model may simplify complex nonlinear associations to conditional weakly stationary processes. For ARMA, TAR, and STAR, order parameters quantify the extent past information is associated with the future. Unfortunately, even if model orders are known a priori, the possibility of over-fitting can lead to sub-optimal forecasting performance. By intentionally overestimating these orders, a linear representation of the full model is exploited and Bayesian regularization can be used to achieve sparsity. Global-local shrinkage priors for AR, MA, and exogenous coefficients are adopted to pull posterior means toward 0 without over-shrinking relevant effects. This dissertation introduces, evaluates, and compares Bayesian techniques that automatically perform model selection and coefficient estimation of ARMA, TAR, and STAR models. Multiple Monte Carlo experiments illustrate the accuracy of these methods in finding the "true" data generating process. Practical applications demonstrate their efficacy in forecasting.
ContributorsGiacomazzo, Mario (Author) / Kamarianakis, Yiannis (Thesis advisor) / Reiser, Mark R. (Committee member) / McCulloch, Robert (Committee member) / Hahn, Richard (Committee member) / Fricks, John (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
Description
This dissertation investigates the classification of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in the presence of non-SLE alternatives, while developing novel curve classification methodologies with wide ranging applications. Functional data representations of plasma thermogram measurements and the corresponding derivative curves provide predictors yet to be investigated for SLE identification. Functional nonparametric classifiers form a methodological basis, which is used herein to develop a) the family of ESFuNC segment-wise curve classification algorithms and b) per-pixel ensembles based on logistic regression and fused-LASSO. The proposed methods achieve test set accuracy rates as high as 94.3%, while returning information about regions of the temperature domain that are critical for population discrimination. The undertaken analyses suggest that derivate-based information contributes significantly in improved classification performance relative to recently published studies on SLE plasma thermograms.
ContributorsBuscaglia, Robert, Ph.D (Author) / Kamarianakis, Yiannis (Thesis advisor) / Armbruster, Dieter (Committee member) / Lanchier, Nicholas (Committee member) / McCulloch, Robert (Committee member) / Reiser, Mark R. (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
Description
Investigation of measurement invariance (MI) commonly assumes correct specification of dimensionality across multiple groups. Although research shows that violation of the dimensionality assumption can cause bias in model parameter estimation for single-group analyses, little research on this issue has been conducted for multiple-group analyses. This study explored the effects of mismatch in dimensionality between data and analysis models with multiple-group analyses at the population and sample levels. Datasets were generated using a bifactor model with different factor structures and were analyzed with bifactor and single-factor models to assess misspecification effects on assessments of MI and latent mean differences. As baseline models, the bifactor models fit data well and had minimal bias in latent mean estimation. However, the low convergence rates of fitting bifactor models to data with complex structures and small sample sizes caused concern. On the other hand, effects of fitting the misspecified single-factor models on the assessments of MI and latent means differed by the bifactor structures underlying data. For data following one general factor and one group factor affecting a small set of indicators, the effects of ignoring the group factor in analysis models on the tests of MI and latent mean differences were mild. In contrast, for data following one general factor and several group factors, oversimplifications of analysis models can lead to inaccurate conclusions regarding MI assessment and latent mean estimation.
ContributorsXu, Yuning (Author) / Green, Samuel (Thesis advisor) / Levy, Roy (Committee member) / Thompson, Marilyn (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
Description
A simulation study was conducted to explore the robustness of general factor mean difference estimation in bifactor ordered-categorical data. In the No Differential Item Functioning (DIF) conditions, the data generation conditions varied were sample size, the number of categories per item, effect size of the general factor mean difference, and the size of specific factor loadings; in data analysis, misspecification conditions were introduced in which the generated bifactor data were fit using a unidimensional model, and/or ordered-categorical data were treated as continuous data. In the DIF conditions, the data generation conditions varied were sample size, the number of categories per item, effect size of latent mean difference for the general factor, the type of item parameters that had DIF, and the magnitude of DIF; the data analysis conditions varied in whether or not setting equality constraints on the noninvariant item parameters.
Results showed that falsely fitting bifactor data using unidimensional models or failing to account for DIF in item parameters resulted in estimation bias in the general factor mean difference, while treating ordinal data as continuous had little influence on the estimation bias as long as there was no severe model misspecification. The extent of estimation bias produced by misspecification of bifactor datasets with unidimensional models was mainly determined by the degree of unidimensionality (i.e., size of specific factor loadings) and the general factor mean difference size. When the DIF was present, the estimation accuracy of the general factor mean difference was completely robust to ignoring noninvariance in specific factor loadings while it was very sensitive to failing to account for DIF in threshold parameters. With respect to ignoring the DIF in general factor loadings, the estimation bias of the general factor mean difference was substantial when the DIF was -0.15, and it can be negligible for smaller sizes of DIF. Despite the impact of model misspecification on estimation accuracy, the power to detect the general factor mean difference was mainly influenced by the sample size and effect size. Serious Type I error rate inflation only occurred when the DIF was present in threshold parameters.
Results showed that falsely fitting bifactor data using unidimensional models or failing to account for DIF in item parameters resulted in estimation bias in the general factor mean difference, while treating ordinal data as continuous had little influence on the estimation bias as long as there was no severe model misspecification. The extent of estimation bias produced by misspecification of bifactor datasets with unidimensional models was mainly determined by the degree of unidimensionality (i.e., size of specific factor loadings) and the general factor mean difference size. When the DIF was present, the estimation accuracy of the general factor mean difference was completely robust to ignoring noninvariance in specific factor loadings while it was very sensitive to failing to account for DIF in threshold parameters. With respect to ignoring the DIF in general factor loadings, the estimation bias of the general factor mean difference was substantial when the DIF was -0.15, and it can be negligible for smaller sizes of DIF. Despite the impact of model misspecification on estimation accuracy, the power to detect the general factor mean difference was mainly influenced by the sample size and effect size. Serious Type I error rate inflation only occurred when the DIF was present in threshold parameters.
ContributorsLiu, Yixing (Author) / Thompson, Marilyn (Thesis advisor) / Levy, Roy (Committee member) / O’Rourke, Holly (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2019
Description
In this work, I present a Bayesian inference computational framework for the analysis of widefield microscopy data that addresses three challenges: (1) counting and localizing stationary fluorescent molecules; (2) inferring a spatially-dependent effective fluorescence profile that describes the spatially-varying rate at which fluorescent molecules emit subsequently-detected photons (due to different illumination intensities or different local environments); and (3) inferring the camera gain. My general theoretical framework utilizes the Bayesian nonparametric Gaussian and beta-Bernoulli processes with a Markov chain Monte Carlo sampling scheme, which I further specify and implement for Total Internal Reflection Fluorescence (TIRF) microscopy data, benchmarking the method on synthetic data. These three frameworks are self-contained, and can be used concurrently so that the fluorescence profile and emitter locations are both considered unknown and, under some conditions, learned simultaneously. The framework I present is flexible and may be adapted to accommodate the inference of other parameters, such as emission photophysical kinetics and the trajectories of moving molecules. My TIRF-specific implementation may find use in the study of structures on cell membranes, or in studying local sample properties that affect fluorescent molecule photon emission rates.
ContributorsWallgren, Ross (Author) / Presse, Steve (Thesis advisor) / Armbruster, Hans (Thesis advisor) / McCulloch, Robert (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2019
Description
Bayesian Additive Regression Trees (BART) is a non-parametric Bayesian model
that often outperforms other popular predictive models in terms of out-of-sample error. This thesis studies a modified version of BART called Accelerated Bayesian Additive Regression Trees (XBART). The study consists of simulation and real data experiments comparing XBART to other leading algorithms, including BART. The results show that XBART maintains BART’s predictive power while reducing its computation time. The thesis also describes the development of a Python package implementing XBART.
that often outperforms other popular predictive models in terms of out-of-sample error. This thesis studies a modified version of BART called Accelerated Bayesian Additive Regression Trees (XBART). The study consists of simulation and real data experiments comparing XBART to other leading algorithms, including BART. The results show that XBART maintains BART’s predictive power while reducing its computation time. The thesis also describes the development of a Python package implementing XBART.
ContributorsYalov, Saar (Author) / Hahn, P. Richard (Thesis advisor) / McCulloch, Robert (Committee member) / Kao, Ming-Hung (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2019