Cargando…
Comparison of Estimation Procedures for Multilevel AR(1) Models
To estimate a time series model for multiple individuals, a multilevel model may be used. In this paper we compare two estimation methods for the autocorrelation in Multilevel AR(1) models, namely Maximum Likelihood Estimation (MLE) and Bayesian Markov Chain Monte Carlo. Furthermore, we examine the...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4876370/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27242559 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00486 |
_version_ | 1782433224799027200 |
---|---|
author | Krone, Tanja Albers, Casper J. Timmerman, Marieke E. |
author_facet | Krone, Tanja Albers, Casper J. Timmerman, Marieke E. |
author_sort | Krone, Tanja |
collection | PubMed |
description | To estimate a time series model for multiple individuals, a multilevel model may be used. In this paper we compare two estimation methods for the autocorrelation in Multilevel AR(1) models, namely Maximum Likelihood Estimation (MLE) and Bayesian Markov Chain Monte Carlo. Furthermore, we examine the difference between modeling fixed and random individual parameters. To this end, we perform a simulation study with a fully crossed design, in which we vary the length of the time series (10 or 25), the number of individuals per sample (10 or 25), the mean of the autocorrelation (−0.6 to 0.6 inclusive, in steps of 0.3) and the standard deviation of the autocorrelation (0.25 or 0.40). We found that the random estimators of the population autocorrelation show less bias and higher power, compared to the fixed estimators. As expected, the random estimators profit strongly from a higher number of individuals, while this effect is small for the fixed estimators. The fixed estimators profit slightly more from a higher number of time points than the random estimators. When possible, random estimation is preferred to fixed estimation. The difference between MLE and Bayesian estimation is nearly negligible. The Bayesian estimation shows a smaller bias, but MLE shows a smaller variability (i.e., standard deviation of the parameter estimates). Finally, better results are found for a higher number of individuals and time points, and for a lower individual variability of the autocorrelation. The effect of the size of the autocorrelation differs between outcome measures. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4876370 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-48763702016-05-30 Comparison of Estimation Procedures for Multilevel AR(1) Models Krone, Tanja Albers, Casper J. Timmerman, Marieke E. Front Psychol Psychology To estimate a time series model for multiple individuals, a multilevel model may be used. In this paper we compare two estimation methods for the autocorrelation in Multilevel AR(1) models, namely Maximum Likelihood Estimation (MLE) and Bayesian Markov Chain Monte Carlo. Furthermore, we examine the difference between modeling fixed and random individual parameters. To this end, we perform a simulation study with a fully crossed design, in which we vary the length of the time series (10 or 25), the number of individuals per sample (10 or 25), the mean of the autocorrelation (−0.6 to 0.6 inclusive, in steps of 0.3) and the standard deviation of the autocorrelation (0.25 or 0.40). We found that the random estimators of the population autocorrelation show less bias and higher power, compared to the fixed estimators. As expected, the random estimators profit strongly from a higher number of individuals, while this effect is small for the fixed estimators. The fixed estimators profit slightly more from a higher number of time points than the random estimators. When possible, random estimation is preferred to fixed estimation. The difference between MLE and Bayesian estimation is nearly negligible. The Bayesian estimation shows a smaller bias, but MLE shows a smaller variability (i.e., standard deviation of the parameter estimates). Finally, better results are found for a higher number of individuals and time points, and for a lower individual variability of the autocorrelation. The effect of the size of the autocorrelation differs between outcome measures. Frontiers Media S.A. 2016-04-07 /pmc/articles/PMC4876370/ /pubmed/27242559 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00486 Text en Copyright © 2016 Krone, Albers and Timmerman. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Psychology Krone, Tanja Albers, Casper J. Timmerman, Marieke E. Comparison of Estimation Procedures for Multilevel AR(1) Models |
title | Comparison of Estimation Procedures for Multilevel AR(1) Models |
title_full | Comparison of Estimation Procedures for Multilevel AR(1) Models |
title_fullStr | Comparison of Estimation Procedures for Multilevel AR(1) Models |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of Estimation Procedures for Multilevel AR(1) Models |
title_short | Comparison of Estimation Procedures for Multilevel AR(1) Models |
title_sort | comparison of estimation procedures for multilevel ar(1) models |
topic | Psychology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4876370/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27242559 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00486 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kronetanja comparisonofestimationproceduresformultilevelar1models AT alberscasperj comparisonofestimationproceduresformultilevelar1models AT timmermanmariekee comparisonofestimationproceduresformultilevelar1models |