[R-sig-ME] Is crossed random-effect the only choice?

Thierry Onkelinx th|erry@onke||nx @end|ng |rom |nbo@be
Mon Jul 19 08:58:24 CEST 2021


Dear Jack,

In your example H is implicitly nested in X. See
https://www.muscardinus.be/2017/07/lme4-random-effects/ for
more information on nested vs crossed effects.

Best regards,

ir. Thierry Onkelinx
Statisticus / Statistician

Vlaamse Overheid / Government of Flanders
INSTITUUT VOOR NATUUR- EN BOSONDERZOEK / RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR NATURE AND
FOREST
Team Biometrie & Kwaliteitszorg / Team Biometrics & Quality Assurance
thierry.onkelinx using inbo.be
Havenlaan 88 bus 73, 1000 Brussel
www.inbo.be

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
To call in the statistician after the experiment is done may be no more
than asking him to perform a post-mortem examination: he may be able to say
what the experiment died of. ~ Sir Ronald Aylmer Fisher
The plural of anecdote is not data. ~ Roger Brinner
The combination of some data and an aching desire for an answer does not
ensure that a reasonable answer can be extracted from a given body of data.
~ John Tukey
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

<https://www.inbo.be>


Op vr 16 jul. 2021 om 01:09 schreef Jack Solomon <kj.jsolomon using gmail.com>:

> Dear Ben,
>
> Just to make sure, the structure of my data is below. With this data
> structure, I wonder why ~ (1|H) + (1|X) would indicate that H and X are
> crossed random-effects?
>
> Because theoretically every value of X is capable of meeting every value of
> H (Or because each value of X means the same thing across any given value
> of H)?
>
> Does this also mean each unique cluster (separately for H & X) is
> considered correlated with another cluster?
>
> Thank you, Jack
>
> H  X
> 1   2
> 1   2
> 2   1
> 2   1
> 2   1
> 3   2
> 4   1
>
> On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 8:46 AM Ben Bolker <bbolker using gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On 7/15/21 9:44 AM, Jack Solomon wrote:
> > > Dear Ben,
> > >
> > > In the case of #3 in your response, if the researcher intends to
> > > generalize beyond the 3 levels of the categorical factor/ predictor X,
> > > then can s/he use: ~ (1|H) + (1|X)?
> > >
> > > If yes, then H and X will be crossed?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Jack
> >
> >    Yes, and yes.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sat, Jul 10, 2021, 10:36 PM Jack Solomon <kj.jsolomon using gmail.com
> > > <mailto:kj.jsolomon using gmail.com>> wrote:
> > >
> > >     Dear Ben,
> > >
> > >     Thank you for your informative response. I think # 4 is what
> matches
> > >     my situation.
> > >
> > >     Thanks again, Jack
> > >
> > >     On Sat, Jul 10, 2021 at 8:30 PM Ben Bolker <bbolker using gmail.com
> > >     <mailto:bbolker using gmail.com>> wrote:
> > >
> > >             The "crossed vs random" terminology is only relevant in
> > >         models with
> > >         more than one grouping variable.  I would call (1|X) " a random
> > >         effect
> > >         of X" or more precisely "a random-intercept model with grouping
> > >         variable X"
> > >
> > >             However, your question is a little unclear to me.  Is X a
> > >         grouping
> > >         variable or a predictor variable (numeric or categorical) that
> > >         varies
> > >         across groups?
> > >
> > >             I can think of four possibilities.
> > >
> > >            1. X is the grouping variable (e.g. "hospital"). Then ~
> (1|X)
> > >         is a
> > >         model that describes variation in the model intercept /
> baseline
> > >         value,
> > >         across hospitals.
> > >
> > >            2. X is a continuous covariate (e.g. annual hospital
> > >         budget).  Then if
> > >         H is the factor designating hospitals, we want  ~ X + (1|H)
> > >         (plus any
> > >         other fixed effects of interest. (It doesn't make sense / isn't
> > >         identifiable to fit a random-slopes model ~ (H | X) because
> > budgets
> > >         don't vary within hospitals.
> > >
> > >         3. X is a categorical / factor predictor (e.g. hospital size
> > class
> > >         {small, medium, large} with multiple hospitals measured in each
> > >         size
> > >         class:  ~ X + (1|H) (the same as #2).
> > >
> > >         4. X is a categorical predictor with unique values for each
> > >         hospital
> > >         (e.g. postal code).  Then X is redundant with H, you shouldn't
> > >         try to
> > >         include them both in the same model.
> > >
> > >         On 7/10/21 4:55 PM, Jack Solomon wrote:
> > >          > Hello Allo,
> > >          >
> > >          > In my two-level data structure, I have a cluster-level
> > >         variable (called
> > >          > "X"; one that doesn't vary in any cluster). If I intend to
> > >         generalize
> > >          > beyond X's current possible levels, then, I should take X as
> > >         a random
> > >          > effect.
> > >          >
> > >          > However, because "X" doesn't vary in any cluster, therefore,
> > >         such a random
> > >          > effect necessarily must be a crossed random effect (e.g., "~
> > >         1 | X"),
> > >          > correct?
> > >          >
> > >          > If yes, then what is "X" crossed with?
> > >          >
> > >          > Thank you,
> > >          > Jack
> > >          >
> > >          >       [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
> > >          >
> > >          > _______________________________________________
> > >          > R-sig-mixed-models using r-project.org
> > >         <mailto:R-sig-mixed-models using r-project.org> mailing list
> > >          > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-mixed-models
> > >         <https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-mixed-models>
> > >          >
> > >
> > >         --
> > >         Dr. Benjamin Bolker
> > >         Professor, Mathematics & Statistics and Biology, McMaster
> > University
> > >         Director, School of Computational Science and Engineering
> > >         Graduate chair, Mathematics & Statistics
> > >
> > >         _______________________________________________
> > >         R-sig-mixed-models using r-project.org
> > >         <mailto:R-sig-mixed-models using r-project.org> mailing list
> > >         https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-mixed-models
> > >         <https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-mixed-models>
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Dr. Benjamin Bolker
> > Professor, Mathematics & Statistics and Biology, McMaster University
> > Director, School of Computational Science and Engineering
> > Graduate chair, Mathematics & Statistics
> >
>
>         [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
>
> _______________________________________________
> R-sig-mixed-models using r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-mixed-models
>

	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]



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