An Evaluation of Information Criteria Use for Correct Cross-Classified Random Effects Model Selection

Autor/inn/en	Beretvas, S. Natasha; Murphy, Daniel L.
Titel	An Evaluation of Information Criteria Use for Correct Cross-Classified Random Effects Model Selection
Quelle	In: Journal of Experimental Education, 81 (2013) 4, S.429-463 (35 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0022-0973
DOI	10.1080/00220973.2012.745467
Schlagwörter	Models; Goodness of Fit; Evaluation Criteria; Educational Research; Sample Size; Classification; Middle Schools; High Schools; Statistical Distributions; Simulation; Equations (Mathematics) + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Analogiemodell; Bildungsforschung; Pädagogische Forschung; Classification system; Klassifikation; Klassifikationssystem; Middle school; Mittelschule; Mittelstufenschule; High school; Oberschule; Wahrscheinlichkeitsverteilung; Simulation program; Simulationsprogramm; Equations; Mathematics; Gleichungslehre
Abstract	The authors assessed correct model identification rates of Akaike's information criterion (AIC), corrected criterion (AICC), consistent AIC (CAIC), Hannon and Quinn's information criterion (HQIC), and Bayesian information criterion (BIC) for selecting among cross-classified random effects models. Performance of default values for the 5 indices used by SAS PROC MIXED for estimating a 2-level cross-classified random effects model were compared with modifications to the sample size used in the AICC, CAIC, HQIC, and BIC formulations. The sample sizes explored included the number of level 1 units (N), the average number of classification units (m), and the number of nonempty classification cells (c). The authors also assessed performance of the X[superscript 2] "diff" test for testing the difference in fit between 2 nested cross-classified random effects models. The X[superscript 2] "diff" exhibited a slightly inflated Type I error rate with high power. The modified information criteria performed better than did the default values. Pairing of N with the HQIC, BIC, and CAIC and of m with the AICC worked best. Results and suggestions for future research are discussed. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 325 Chestnut Street Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Fax: 215-625-2940; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2017/4/10