Typical paper follow-ups Paper is wrong (in the sense of a real mistake) There is an alternative explanation for the analytical results. You test that alternative against the original explanation. Paper’s conclusion might be dependent on design/measurement/analysis. Redo with different kind of design/measurement/analysis. Show that it matters. Paper is right, but conclusions limited to a given time or place or context. Test in another place or context. Paper argues that X’s of a given kind are important  you check several other X’s of that kind, or  you check several X’s of a different kind and compare strengths A connection X  Y is given with a “theory” behind it. You check that theory behind it in more detail (typically with another kind of design/measurement/analysis).

Advanced Methods and Models in Behavioral Research – 2013 Instead of Friday, March 20: This monday, 25 March, hours 7 and 8 In addition to the regular program: Tuesday, 2 April, hours 7 and 8 Regular: Friday, 5 April, hours 5 and 6

Advanced Methods and Models in Behavioral Research – 2013 Check out: My logistic regression run on auto.dta (Not easy / thinking out loud / there is more than one correct answer) Revisit your own and others’ logit do files; check if you are able to do this yourself

The exam Advanced Methods and Models in Behavioral Research – 2013 Same kind of setup as MMBR: On laptop ExamMonitor installed No books or notes allowed, only Stata’s help files but: No (or hardly any) multiple choice questions Largest part is working on data MMBR is considered working knowledge You get the data before the exam (!)

Our exam data Roger Fuchs & Freek Schoonbrood BEP project Go through the experiment at the link supplied in a minute Make sure to: –Answer seriously –Understand that your are doing a conjoint analysis –Realize that the data from this experiment are going to be the ones that we will use during the exam –Write down notes for improvement of the survey Advanced Methods and Models in Behavioral Research – 2013

Logistics We now go through the experiment We try to come up with as many improvements as we can think of Roger and Freek implement the ones they feel make sense today Everyone arranges for at least 5 participants as of tomorrow: ensure some variance! (and/or put an invite on your Facebook/Twitter/... page) As soon as I have at least some data, I will put the data set online (note that it might not be complete yet, as there might follow some more participants later) (note that we are doing this sort of quick-and-dirty: we do not check for all kinds of sampling biases, etc. Think about how we could have done that!) Advanced Methods and Models in Behavioral Research – 2013

Advanced Methods and Models in Behavioral Research – 2013

In with the (multi-level) statistics... Advanced Methods and Models in Behavioral Research – 2013

AMMBR course design CONTENT METHOD Y is 0/1 conjoint analysis logistic regression multi-level methods our own survey

Advanced Methods and Models in Behavioral Research – 2013 MULTI – LEVEL ANALYSIS

Advanced Methods and Models in Behavioral Research – 2013 Multi-level models or... dealing with clustered data. One solution: the variance component model Bayesian hierarchical models mixed models (in SPSS) hierarchical linear models random effects models random coefficient models subject specific models variance component models variance heterogeneity models

Advanced Methods and Models in Behavioral Research – 2013 Clustered data / multi-level models Pupils within schools (within regions within countries) Firms within regions (or sectors) Vignettes within persons Employees within stores (our fastfood.dta example)

Advanced Methods and Models in Behavioral Research – 2013 Two issues with clustered data Your estimates will (in all likelihood) be too precise: you find effects that do not exist in the population [do we get that?] You will want to distinguish between effects within clusters and effects between clusters [see next two slides]

Advanced Methods and Models in Behavioral Research – 2013 On individual vs aggregate data For instance: X = introvertX = age of McDonald’s employee Y = school resultsY = like the manager

Advanced Methods and Models in Behavioral Research – 2013 Had we only known, that the data are clustered! So the effect of an X within clusters can be different from the effect between clusters! Using the school example: lines represent schools. And within schools the effect of being introvert is positive!

Advanced Methods and Models in Behavioral Research – 2013 MAIN MESSAGES Be able to recognize clustered data and deal with it appropriately (how to do that will follow) Distinguish two kinds of effects: those at the "micro-level" (within clusters) vs those at the aggregate level (between clusters). They need not be the same! (and... do not test a micro-hypothesis with aggregate data)

Advanced Methods and Models in Behavioral Research – 2013 A toy example – two schools, two pupils Overall mean(0) Two schools each with two pupils. We first calculate the means. Overall mean= (3+2+(-1)+(-4))/4= exam score School 2School 1 (taken from Rasbash)

Advanced Methods and Models in Behavioral Research – 2013 Now the variance Overall mean(0) exam score School 2School 1 The total variance is the sum of the squares of the departures of the observations around the mean, divided by the sample size (4) = ( )/4=7.5

Advanced Methods and Models in Behavioral Research – 2013 The variance of the school means around the overall mean exam score School 2School 1 Overall mean(0) The variance of the school means around the overall mean= ( (-2.5) 2 )/2=6.25 (total variance was 7.5)

Advanced Methods and Models in Behavioral Research – 2013 The variance of the pupils scores around their school’s mean exam score School 2School The variance of the pupils scores around their school’s mean= ((3-2.5) 2 + (2-2.5) 2 + (-1-(-2.5)) 2 + (-4-(-2.5)) 2 )/4 =1.25

Advanced Methods and Models in Behavioral Research – > So you can partition the total variance in individual level variance and school level variance How much of the variability in pupil attainment is attributable to factors at the school and how much to factors at the pupil level? In terms of our toy example we can now say 6.25/7.5= 82% of the total variation of pupils attainment is attributable to school level factors 1.25/7.5= 18% of the total variation of pupils attainment is attributable to pupil level factors And this is important; we want to know how to explain (in this example) school attainment, and appararently the differences are at the school level more than the pupil level

Advanced Methods and Models in Behavioral Research – 2013 Standard multiple regression won't do YD1D2D3D4D5id… ……………3 +2……………3 -3……………4 +4……………4 ………………… So you can use all the data and just run a multiple regression, but then you disregard the clustering effect, which gives uncorrect confidence intervals (and cannot distinguish between effects at the cluster vs at the school level) Possible solution (but not so good) You can aggregate within clusters, and then run a multiple regression on the aggregate data. Two problems: no individual level testing possible + you get much less data points. So what can we do?

Advanced Methods and Models in Behavioral Research – 2013 Multi-level models The standard multiple regression model assumes... with the subscript "i" defined at the case-level.... and the epsilons independently distributed with covariance matrix I. With clustered data, you know these assumptions are not met.

Advanced Methods and Models in Behavioral Research – 2013 Solution 1: add dummy-variables per cluster Try multiple regression, but with as many dummy variables as you have clusters (minus 1)... where, in this example, there are j+1 clusters. IF the clustering differences are (largely) due to differences in the intercept between persons, this might work. BUT if there are only a handful of cases per person, this necessitates a huge number of extra variables

Advanced Methods and Models in Behavioral Research – 2013 Solution 2: split your micro-level X-vars Say you have: then create: and add both as predictors (instead of x 1 ) Make sure that you understand what is happening here, and why it is of use.

Advanced Methods and Models in Behavioral Research – 2013 Solution 3: the variance component model In the variance component model, we split the randomness in a "personal part" and a "rest part"

Advanced Methods and Models in Behavioral Research – 2013 Now: how do you do this in Stata? [note to CS: use age and schooling as examples to split at restaurant level] relevant commands xtset and xtreg bys : egen = mean( ) gen dvarB = - convenience commands tab, gen()drop orderdes editsum

Advanced Methods and Models in Behavioral Research – 2013 Up next How do we run the "Solution 1”, "Solution 2”, and “Solution 3” analysis and compare which works best? What about assumption checking? Random intercept we now saw, but how about random slopes?

Advanced Methods and Models in Behavioral Research – 2013 When you have multi-level data (2 levels) 1.If applicable: consider whether using separate dummies per group might help (use only when this does not create a lot of dummies) 2.Run an empty mixed model (i.e., just the constant included) in Stata. Look at the level on which most of the variance resides. 3.If applicable: divide micro-variables in "group mean" variables and "difference from group mean" variables. 4.Re-run your mixed model with these variables included (as you would a multiple regression analysis) 5.(and note: use regression diagnostics secretly, to find outliers and such)

On non-response Advanced Methods and Models in Behavioral Research – 2013

Non-response analysis Not all of the ones invited are going to participate Think about selective non-response: some (kinds of) individuals might be less likely to participate. How might that influence the results? sample

Data: TVSFP on influencing behavior Advanced Methods and Models in Behavioral Research – 2013

Online as motoroccasion8March2013.dta Online as motoroccasion8March2013.dta