Multilevel analysis of matching behavior: A comparison of maximum likelihood and Bayesian estimation.
Bayesian estimation
matching behavior
matching law
maximum likelihood
multilevel model
pooled data
statistical analysis
Journal
Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior
ISSN: 1938-3711
Titre abrégé: J Exp Anal Behav
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0203727
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
09 2023
09 2023
Historique:
received:
27
09
2022
accepted:
29
05
2023
medline:
4
9
2023
pubmed:
16
6
2023
entrez:
16
6
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
While trying to infer laws of behavior, accounting for both within-subjects and between-subjects variance is often overlooked. It has been advocated recently to use multilevel modeling to analyze matching behavior. Using multilevel modeling within behavior analysis has its own challenges though. Adequate sample sizes are required (at both levels) for unbiased parameter estimates. The purpose of the current study is to compare parameter recovery and hypothesis rejection rates of maximum likelihood (ML) estimation and Bayesian estimation (BE) of multilevel models for matching behavior studies. Four factors were investigated through simulations: number of subjects, number of measurements by subject, sensitivity (slope), and variance of the random effect. Results showed that both ML estimation and BE with flat priors yielded acceptable statistical properties for intercept and slope fixed effects. The ML estimation procedure generally had less bias, lower RMSE, more power, and false-positive rates closer to the nominal rate. Thus, we recommend ML estimation over BE with uninformative priors, considering our results. The BE procedure requires more informative priors to be used in multilevel modeling of matching behavior, which will require further studies.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
253-262Informations de copyright
© 2023 The Authors. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior.
Références
Arend, M. G., & Shäfer, T. (2019). Statistical power in two-level models: A tutorial on Monte Carlo simulation. Psychological Methods, 24(1), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000195
Austin, P. C., & Leckie, G. (2018). The effect of number of clusters and cluster size on statistical power and Type I error rates when testing random effects variance components in multilevel linear and logistic regression models. Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation, 88(16), 3151-3163. https://doi.org/10.1080/00949655.2018.1504945
Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1-48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01
Baum, W. M. (1974). On two types of deviation from the matching law: Bias and undermatching. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 22(1), 231-242. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1974.22-231
Baum, W. M. (1979). Matching, undermatching, and overmatching in studies of choice. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 32(2), 269-281. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1979.32-269
Bradley, J. V. (1978). Robustness? British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 31(2), 144-152. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8317.1978.tb00581.x
Brooks, S. P. (1998). Markov chain Monte Carlo method and its application. The American Statistician, 47(1), 69-100. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9884.00117
Caron, P.-O. (2019). Multilevel modeling of matching behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 111(2), 183-191. https://doi.org/10.1002/JEAB.510
Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155-159. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-2909.112.1.155.
Cousineau, D., & Laurencelle, L. (2016). A correction factor for the impact of cluster randomized sampling and its applications. Psychological Methods, 21(1), 121-135. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000055
Cowles, M. K., & Carlin, B. P. (1996). Markov chain Monte Carlo convergence diagnostics: A comparative review. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 91(434), 883-904. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1996.10476956
Davison, M., & Hogsden, I. (1984). Concurrent variable-interval schedule performance: Fixed versus mixed reinforcer durations. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 41(2), 169-182. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1984.41-169
Davison, M., & McCarthy, D. (1988). The matching law: A research review. Erlbaum.
Gelman, A., & Hill, J. (2006). Data analysis using regression and multilevel/hierarchical models. Cambridge University Press.
Gelman, A., & Rubin, D. B. (1992). Inference from iterative simulation using multiple sequences. Statistical Science, 7, 457-472. https://doi.org/10.1214/ss/1177011136
Geweke, J. (1992). Evaluating the accuracy of sampling-based approaches to calculating posterior moments. In J. M. Bernado, J. O. Berger, A. P. Dawid, & A. M. F. Smith (Eds.), Bayesian Statistics 4 (pp. 169-193). Clarendon Press.
Halekoh, U., & Højsgaard, S. (2014). A Kenward-Roger approximation and parametric bootstrap methods for tests in linear mixed models: The R package pbkrtest. Journal of Statistical Software, 59(9), 1-32. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v059.i09
Herrnstein, R. J. (1970). On the law of effect. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 13(2), 243-266. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1970.13-243
Hoff, P. D. (2009). A first course in Bayesian statistical methods. Springer.
Hox, J. J. (2010). Multilevel analysis: Techniques and applications. Routledge.
Kazdin, A. E. (2021). Single-case experimental designs: characteristics, changes, and challenges. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 115(1), 56-85. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.638
Kenward, M. G., & Roger, J. H. (1997). Small sample inference for fixed effects from restricted maximum likelihood. Biometrics, 53(3), 983-997. https://doi.org/10.2307/2533558
Kenward, M. G., & Roger, J. H. (2009). An improved approximation to the precision of fixed effects from restricted maximum likelihood. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 53(7), 2583-2595. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csda.2008.12.013
Kreft, I. (1996). Are multilevel techniques necessary? An overview, including simulation studies. ERIC. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED371033
Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B., & Christensen, R. H. B. (2017). lmerTest package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82(13), 1-26. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v082.i13
Maas, C. J. M., & Hox, J. J. (2005). Sufficient sample sizes for multilevel modeling. Methodology, 1(3), 86-92. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-2241.1.3.86
McNeish, D. M. (2017). Small sample methods for multilevel modeling: A colloquial elucidation of REML and the Kenward-Roger correction. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 52(5), 661-670. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2017.1344538
McNeish, D. M., & Stapleton, L. M. (2016). The effect of small sample size on two-level model estimates: A review and illustration. Educational Psychology Review, 28(2), 295-314. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-014-9287-x
Moeyaert, M., Rindskopf, D., Onghena, P., & Van den Noortgate, W. (2017). Multilevel modeling of single-case data: A comparison of maximum likelihood and Bayesian estimation. Psychological Methods, 22(4), 760-778. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000136
Myung, J. (2003). Tutorial on maximum likelihood estimation. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 47(1), 90-100. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-2496(02)00028-7
R Core Team. (2022). R: A language and environment for statistical computing [Computer software]. In R Foundation for Statistical Computing. http://www.Rproject.org/
Ripley, B. (2016). Package 'MASS' [Computer software]. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/MASS/MASS.pdf
Rivard, M., Forget, J., Kerr, K., & Bégin, J. (2014). Matching law and sensitivity to therapist's attention in children with autism spectrum disorders. The Psychological Record, 65(1), 79-88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-014-0015-1
Smid, S. C., McNeish, D., Miočević, M., & van de Schoot, R. (2020, 2020/01/02). Bayesian versus frequentist estimation for structural equation models in small sample contexts: A systematic review. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 27(1), 131-161. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2019.1577140
Snijders, T. A. B., & Bosker, R. J. (2012). Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling. Sage.
Stan Development Team. (2020). RStan: the R interface to Stan [Computer software]. http://mc-stan.org/
Wearden, J. H., & Burgess, I. S. (1982). Matching since Baum (1979). Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 38(3), 339-348. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1982.38-339