Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data
-
Upload
melodie-clark -
Category
Documents
-
view
55 -
download
2
description
Transcript of Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data
![Page 1: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
1
Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples
from Dyadic Data
David A. Kenny
University of Connecticut
davidakenny.net\kenny.htm
![Page 2: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
2
Overview
I. Introduction: Dyadic Designs and Models
II. Specification Error
III. Respecifying Fixed Effects Based on the Random Effects
IV. Resolving an Inconsistency
![Page 3: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
3
Caveat
Linear Models
Normally Distributed Random Variables
![Page 4: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
4
![Page 5: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
5
Three Major Dyadic Designs Standard
– Each person has one partner.– Married couples
Social Relations Model (SRM) Designs– Each person has many partners, and each
partner is paired with many persons.– Group members state liking of each other.
One-with-Many– Each person has many partners, but each
partner is paired with only one person.– Patients rate satisfaction with the physician.
![Page 6: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
6
Standard Design
![Page 7: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
7
SRM Designs
![Page 8: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
8
One-with-Many Design
![Page 9: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
9
Model for the Standard Design
Two scores for dyad j:
Y1j = b01 + b11X11j + 1j
Y2j = b02 + b12X12j + 2j
where C(1j, 1j) may be nonzero
![Page 10: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
10
Members Indistinguishable
Y1j = b0 + b1X11j + 1j
Y2j = b0 + b1X12j + 2j
where V(1j) = V(2j) and C(1j,2j) may be nonzero
![Page 11: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
11
Partner Effect with Members Indistinguishable
Y1j = b0 + b1X11j + b2X12j + 1j
Y2j = b0 + b1X12j + b2X11j + 2j
where V(1j) = V(2j) and C(1j,2j) may be nonzero
![Page 12: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
12
Partner Effects with Members Distinguishable
Y1j = b01 + b11X1j + b21X2j + 1j
Y2j = b02 + b12X2j + b22X1j + 2j
where C(1j, 1j) may be nonzero
![Page 13: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
13
Social Relations Model
• model of dyadic relations embedded in groups
• Xijk: actor i with partner j in group k
• round-robin structures: everyone paired with everyone else
• other structures possible
![Page 14: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
14
Round Robin Design
1 2 3 4 5 61 - x x x x x
2 x - x x x x
3 x x - x x x
4 x x x - x x
5 x x x x - x
6 x x x x x -
![Page 15: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
15
The Statistical Model: Random Effects
Xijk = k + ik + jk + ijk
variances (4): 2,
2, 2,
2
covariances (2): ,
(fixed effects discussed later)
![Page 16: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
16
Liking: How much Dave likes Paul
VariancesGroup (
2): How much liking there is in the group.Actor (
2): How much Dave likes others in general.Partner (
2): How much Paul is liked by others in general.Relationship (
2): How much Dave particularly likes Paul.
![Page 17: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
17
Liking: How much Dave likes Paul
Covariances:
Actor-Partner (): If Dave likes
others, is Dave liked by others?
Relationship (): If Dave
particularly likes Paul, does Paul particularly like Dave?
![Page 18: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
18
EstimationANOVA Expected Mean Squares (Warner,
Kenny, & Stoto, JPSP, 1979)Maximum likelihood (Wong, JASA, 1982)Bayesian estimation and fixed effects (Gill &
Swartz, The Canadian Journal of Statistics, 2001)
Estimation with triadic effects (Hoff, JASA, 2005)
![Page 19: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
19
Consensus and Acquaintance
• We would think that we would agree more about targets the longer we know them.
• Evidence (Kenny et al., 1994) does not support this hypothesis.
• Measure: s2/(s
2 + s2 + s
2)
![Page 20: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
20
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Time 1
Tim
e 2
![Page 21: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
21
Model for the One-with-Many Design
Person i (the one of nj persons) is paired with person j (the many):
Yij = b0j + b1X1ij + jj
where V(b0j) may be nonzero
![Page 22: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
22
Model for the One-with-Many Design
Person i (the one of nj persons) is paired with person j (the many):
Yij = b0j + b1jX1ij + ij
where V(b0j), V(b1j), and C(b0j, b1j) may be nonzero
![Page 23: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
23
II. Specification Error
How does specifying the wrong model in one part affect the other part?
![Page 24: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
24
Specification Error in the Random Part
• Unbiased estimates of fixed effects.
• Bias in standard errors• under-estimation
• over-estimation
• little or none
![Page 25: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
25
Example of Bias in Standard Errors
Consider a standard dyad design and a simple model for person i (i =1, 2) in dyad j
Yij = b0 + b1Xij + ij
where C(X1j,X2j)/V(X) = x and C(1j, 2j)/V() = .
![Page 26: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
26
Bias in Standard Error for b1 If e Is Falsely Assumed To Be Zero
• under-estimation: x > 0
• over-estimation: x < 0
• none: x = 0
![Page 27: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
27
Specification Error in Fixed Part
• can dramatically bias random effects
• example: roommate effects and liking
![Page 28: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
28
Kenny & Lowe Study
• 19 round robins of 4• 2 pairs of roommates• Roommates like one another: Mean
difference between roommates and non-roommates
• What if the roommate effect were ignored?
![Page 29: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
29
Kenny & Lowe Study: Results Using ANOVA
Component Estimate
Actor -.754
Partner -.794
Relationship 3.693
![Page 30: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
30
Kenny & Lowe Study: Results Using ANOVA
Component Estimate Revised
Actor -.754 .444
Partner -.794 .597
Relationship 3.693 1.139
![Page 31: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
31
III. Respecifying Fixed Effects Based on Random Effects
• A fixed effect often corresponds to certain random effect.– e.g., fixed effect at a given level
• What if those random effects have zero variance?
• May need to rethink the fixed effects.
![Page 32: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
32
Example• People like being in homogeneous groups.
• Demographic homogeneity
• Same ethnicity
• Same gender
• Same age
• Opinion homogeneity
• People do not like being in diverse groups.
![Page 33: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
33
Conclusion
People do not like being in diverse groups.
But is there group variance in liking?
![Page 34: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
34
Group Variance in Liking?
• Liking tends not to show group effects– SRM analyses of lab groups– SRM studies of families– Rather the dominant component is
relationship.• Group (?) diversity as a relationship effect?
![Page 35: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
35
The Measurement of Diversity
• The usual measure of diversity is a variance or some related measure.
• Not well known is that the variance can be expressed as the sum of squared differences:
s2 = i(Xi – M)2/(n – 1)
= ij(Xi – Xj)2/[n(n - 1)]
i > j
![Page 36: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
36
The Disaggregation of Group Diversity
• Instead of thinking about diversity as a property of the group (i.e., a variance), we can view diversity as the set of relationships.
• It then becomes an empirical question whether it makes sense to sum across different components.
![Page 37: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
37
Dyad Group Data
• Group of Dave, Paul, Bengt, and Thomas
• Dave states how much he likes Paul.
• Dave: actor
• Paul: partner
• Bengt and Thomas: others
![Page 38: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
38
Model for Dyad Group Data
Dyadic Similarity: How similar am I to Paul?
Actor Similarity: How similar am I to others in the group?
Partner Similarity: How similar is Paul to others in the group?
Group: How similar are others to each other?
![Page 39: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
39
What Does Group Diversity Presume?
• Presumes the four effects are of equal magnitude.
• Predicts group similarity has an effect.
• Presence of group variance.
![Page 40: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
40
Example• Harmon Hosch’s Data• Gathered in El Paso, Texas• 134 6-person juries from the jury pool• Mock jury case• Jurors rate how likeable the other
jurors are.• Diversity in terms of initial verdict
preference
![Page 41: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
41
Results: Random EffectsTerm Estimate SE
2 .000 ----
2 .165 .016
2 .045 .013
2 .477 .018
![Page 42: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
42
Results: Fixed EffectsTerm Estimate SE
Diversity -.007 .009
More diversity, others seem less likeable.
![Page 43: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
43
Results: Fixed EffectsTerm Estimate SEDyad .129 .015Actor -.029 .041Partner .006 .041Group .005 .058
You see someone as likeable if they have the same opinion as you.
![Page 44: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
44
What Did We Learn?
At least for the data set under consideration, it is not that group diversity leads to lower liking, but rather being similar to the other, a relationship effect, that leads to perceptions of likeability.
![Page 45: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
45
IV. Resolving an Inconsistency
• It has just been argued that a fixed effect at one level should be “accompanied” by a random effect at that level.
• Blind following of this approach can be problematic.
![Page 46: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
46
Statistical Logic Is Not Necessarily Logical
• We might conclude that groups of various types of persons are different, even though groups may not be different.
• For example, we often conclude women are better than men at understanding others (a fixed effect) while at the same time we conclude that people do not differ in understanding others (a random effect).
![Page 47: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
47
Model• two-level multilevel model• n people each judge m different targets, nm targets
total • two types of judges: n/2 men and n/2 women
Yij = b0 + b1Xj + j + ij
j is person, ij is target, and
Xj(0, 1) is gender]
(Simulation performed by Randi Garcia.)
![Page 48: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
48
Parameter ValuesYij = b0 + b1Xj + j + ij
b0 = 0 and 2 = 1
Fixed effect is a medium effect
size: d = .5.
The fixed and random effects explain
the “same” amount of variance.
![Page 49: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
49
Power of the Tests of Fixed and Random Effects (nm =200)
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
20 (10) 10 (20) 5 (40) 2 (100)
m (n)
Po
we
r
Fixed Power
Random Power
![Page 50: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
50
What we have here is a
failure to communicate.
![Page 51: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
51
Conclusion• In most of the social and
behavioral sciences, there is relatively little attention paid to random effects.
• A parallel examination of both fixed and random effects would be beneficial.
![Page 52: Communication between Fixed and Random Effects: Examples from Dyadic Data](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062321/5681303f550346895d95dbf6/html5/thumbnails/52.jpg)
52