Matching Items (7)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Quantitative psychology
- Creators: Tein, Jenn-Yun
Description
Random Forests is a statistical learning method which has been proposed for propensity score estimation models that involve complex interactions, nonlinear relationships, or both of the covariates. In this dissertation I conducted a simulation study to examine the effects of three Random Forests model specifications in propensity score analysis. The results suggested that, depending on the nature of data, optimal specification of (1) decision rules to select the covariate and its split value in a Classification Tree, (2) the number of covariates randomly sampled for selection, and (3) methods of estimating Random Forests propensity scores could potentially produce an unbiased average treatment effect estimate after propensity scores weighting by the odds adjustment. Compared to the logistic regression estimation model using the true propensity score model, Random Forests had an additional advantage in producing unbiased estimated standard error and correct statistical inference of the average treatment effect. The relationship between the balance on the covariates' means and the bias of average treatment effect estimate was examined both within and between conditions of the simulation. Within conditions, across repeated samples there was no noticeable correlation between the covariates' mean differences and the magnitude of bias of average treatment effect estimate for the covariates that were imbalanced before adjustment. Between conditions, small mean differences of covariates after propensity score adjustment were not sensitive enough to identify the optimal Random Forests model specification for propensity score analysis.
ContributorsCham, Hei Ning (Author) / Tein, Jenn-Yun (Thesis advisor) / Enders, Stephen G (Thesis advisor) / Enders, Craig K. (Committee member) / Mackinnon, David P (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2013
Description
Understanding how adherence affects outcomes is crucial when developing and assigning interventions. However, interventions are often evaluated by conducting randomized experiments and estimating intent-to-treat effects, which ignore actual treatment received. Dose-response effects can supplement intent-to-treat effects when participants are offered the full dose but many only receive a partial dose due to nonadherence. Using these data, we can estimate the magnitude of the treatment effect at different levels of adherence, which serve as a proxy for different levels of treatment. In this dissertation, I conducted Monte Carlo simulations to evaluate when linear dose-response effects can be accurately and precisely estimated in randomized experiments comparing a no-treatment control condition to a treatment condition with partial adherence. Specifically, I evaluated the performance of confounder adjustment and instrumental variable methods when their assumptions were met (Study 1) and when their assumptions were violated (Study 2). In Study 1, the confounder adjustment and instrumental variable methods provided unbiased estimates of the dose-response effect across sample sizes (200, 500, 2,000) and adherence distributions (uniform, right skewed, left skewed). The adherence distribution affected power for the instrumental variable method. In Study 2, the confounder adjustment method provided unbiased or minimally biased estimates of the dose-response effect under no or weak (but not moderate or strong) unobserved confounding. The instrumental variable method provided extremely biased estimates of the dose-response effect under violations of the exclusion restriction (no direct effect of treatment assignment on the outcome), though less severe violations of the exclusion restriction should be investigated.
ContributorsMazza, Gina L (Author) / Grimm, Kevin J. (Thesis advisor) / West, Stephen G. (Thesis advisor) / Mackinnon, David P (Committee member) / Tein, Jenn-Yun (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
Description
With improvements in technology, intensive longitudinal studies that permit the investigation of daily and weekly cycles in behavior have increased exponentially over the past few decades. Traditionally, when data have been collected on two variables over time, multivariate time series approaches that remove trends, cycles, and serial dependency have been used. These analyses permit the study of the relationship between random shocks (perturbations) in the presumed causal series and changes in the outcome series, but do not permit the study of the relationships between cycles. Liu and West (2016) proposed a multilevel approach that permitted the study of potential between subject relationships between features of the cycles in two series (e.g., amplitude). However, I show that the application of the Liu and West approach is restricted to a small set of features and types of relationships between the series. Several authors (e.g., Boker & Graham, 1998) proposed a connected mass-spring model that appears to permit modeling of more general cyclic relationships. I showed that the undamped connected mass-spring model is also limited and may be unidentified. To test the severity of the restrictions of the motion trajectories producible by the undamped connected mass-spring model I mathematically derived their connection to the force equations of the undamped connected mass-spring system. The mathematical solution describes the domain of the trajectory pairs that are producible by the undamped connected mass-spring model. The set of producible trajectory pairs is highly restricted, and this restriction sets major limitations on the application of the connected mass-spring model to psychological data. I used a simulation to demonstrate that even if a pair of psychological time-varying variables behaved exactly like two masses in an undamped connected mass-spring system, the connected mass-spring model would not yield adequate parameter estimates. My simulation probed the performance of the connected mass-spring model as a function of several aspects of data quality including number of subjects, series length, sampling rate relative to the cycle, and measurement error in the data. The findings can be extended to damped and nonlinear connected mass-spring systems.
ContributorsMartynova, Elena (M.A.) (Author) / West, Stephen G. (Thesis advisor) / Amazeen, Polemnia (Committee member) / Tein, Jenn-Yun (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2019
Description
To make meaningful comparisons on a construct of interest across groups or over time, measurement invariance needs to exist for at least a subset of the observed variables that define the construct. Often, chi-square difference tests are used to test for measurement invariance. However, these statistics are affected by sample size such that larger sample sizes are associated with a greater prevalence of significant tests. Thus, using other measures of non-invariance to aid in the decision process would be beneficial. For this dissertation project, I proposed four new effect size measures of measurement non-invariance and analyzed a Monte Carlo simulation study to evaluate their properties and behavior in addition to the properties and behavior of an already existing effect size measure of non-invariance. The effect size measures were evaluated based on bias, variability, and consistency. Additionally, the factors that affected the value of the effect size measures were analyzed. All studied effect sizes were consistent, but three were biased under certain conditions. Further work is needed to establish benchmarks for the unbiased effect sizes.
ContributorsGunn, Heather J (Author) / Grimm, Kevin J. (Thesis advisor) / Edwards, Michael C (Thesis advisor) / Tein, Jenn-Yun (Committee member) / Anderson, Samantha F. (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2019
Description
Researchers who conduct longitudinal studies are inherently interested in studying individual and population changes over time (e.g., mathematics achievement, subjective well-being). To answer such research questions, models of change (e.g., growth models) make the assumption of longitudinal measurement invariance. In many applied situations, key constructs are measured by a collection of ordered-categorical indicators (e.g., Likert scale items). To evaluate longitudinal measurement invariance with ordered-categorical indicators, a set of hierarchical models can be sequentially tested and compared. If the statistical tests of measurement invariance fail to be supported for one of the models, it is useful to have a method with which to gauge the practical significance of the differences in measurement model parameters over time. Drawing on studies of latent growth models and second-order latent growth models with continuous indicators (e.g., Kim & Willson, 2014a; 2014b; Leite, 2007; Wirth, 2008), this study examined the performance of a potential sensitivity analysis to gauge the practical significance of violations of longitudinal measurement invariance for ordered-categorical indicators using second-order latent growth models. The change in the estimate of the second-order growth parameters following the addition of an incorrect level of measurement invariance constraints at the first-order level was used as an effect size for measurement non-invariance. This study investigated how sensitive the proposed sensitivity analysis was to different locations of non-invariance (i.e., non-invariance in the factor loadings, the thresholds, and the unique factor variances) given a sufficient sample size. This study also examined whether the sensitivity of the proposed sensitivity analysis depended on a number of other factors including the magnitude of non-invariance, the number of non-invariant indicators, the number of non-invariant occasions, and the number of response categories in the indicators.
ContributorsLiu, Yu, Ph.D (Author) / West, Stephen G. (Thesis advisor) / Tein, Jenn-Yun (Thesis advisor) / Green, Samuel (Committee member) / Grimm, Kevin J. (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
Mediation analysis is integral to psychology, investigating human behavior’s causal mechanisms. The diversity of explanations for human behavior has implications for the estimation and interpretation of statistical mediation models. Individuals can have similar observed outcomes while undergoing different causal processes or different observed outcomes while receiving the same treatment. Researchers can employ diverse strategies when studying individual differences in multiple mediation pathways, including individual fit measures and analysis of residuals. This dissertation investigates the use of individual residuals and fit measures to identify individual differences in multiple mediation pathways. More specifically, this study focuses on mediation model residuals in a heterogeneous population in which some people experience indirect effects through one mediator and others experience indirect effects through a different mediator. A simulation study investigates 162 conditions defined by effect size and sample size for three proposed methods: residual differences, delta z, and generalized Cook’s distance. Results indicate that analogs of Type 1 error rates are generally acceptable for the method of residual differences, but statistical power is limited. Likewise, neither delta z nor gCd could reliably distinguish between contrasts that had true effects and those that did not. The outcomes of this study reveal the potential for statistical measures of individual mediation. However, limitations related to unequal subpopulation variances, multiple dependent variables, the inherent relationship between direct effects and unestimated indirect effects, and minimal contrast effects require more research to develop a simple method that researchers can use on single data sets.
ContributorsSmyth, Heather Lynn (Author) / MacKinnon, David (Thesis advisor) / Tein, Jenn-Yun (Committee member) / McNeish, Daniel (Committee member) / Grimm, Kevin (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2022