[R-sig-ME] Confidence interval around random effect variances in place of p-value

Ben Bolker bbo|ker @end|ng |rom gm@||@com
Sat Apr 3 01:19:02 CEST 2021

   This seems like a potential can of worms (as indeed are all 
hypothesis tests of null values on a boundary ...) However, in this case 
bootstrapping (provided you have resampled appropriately - you may need 
to do hierarchical bootstrapping ...) seems reasonable, because a null 
model would give you singular fits (i.e. estimated sd=0) half of the 
time ...

   Happy to hear more informed opinions.

On 4/2/21 6:55 PM, Jack Solomon wrote:
> Dear All,
> A colleague of mine suggested that I use the bootstrapped CIs around my
> model's random effect variances in place of p-values for them.
> But random effect variances (or sds) start from "0". So, to declare a
> statistically NON-significant random effect variance component, the
> lower bound of the CI must be EXACTLY "0", right?
> Thank you very much,
> Jack
> 	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
> _______________________________________________
> R-sig-mixed-models using r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-mixed-models

More information about the R-sig-mixed-models mailing list