Loading…
A Monte Carlo method for comparing generalized estimating equations to conventional statistical techniques for discounting data
Discounting is the process by which outcomes lose value. Much of discounting research has focused on differences in the degree of discounting across various groups. This research has relied heavily on conventional null hypothesis significance tests that are familiar to psychologists, such as t‐tests...
Saved in:
Published in: | Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior 2019-03, Vol.111 (2), p.207-224 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3837-f231a2d0af65f0bef3f7740f800c5b3416f152cafbb88039cdfb696d059670183 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3837-f231a2d0af65f0bef3f7740f800c5b3416f152cafbb88039cdfb696d059670183 |
container_end_page | 224 |
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 207 |
container_title | Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior |
container_volume | 111 |
creator | Friedel, Jonathan E. DeHart, William B. Foreman, Anne M. Andrew, Michael E. |
description | Discounting is the process by which outcomes lose value. Much of discounting research has focused on differences in the degree of discounting across various groups. This research has relied heavily on conventional null hypothesis significance tests that are familiar to psychologists, such as t‐tests and ANOVAs. As discounting research questions have become more complex by simultaneously focusing on within‐subject and between‐group differences, conventional statistical testing is often not appropriate for the obtained data. Generalized estimating equations (GEE) are one type of mixed‐effects model that are designed to handle autocorrelated data, such as within‐subject repeated‐measures data, and are therefore more appropriate for discounting data. To determine if GEE provides similar results as conventional statistical tests, we compared the techniques across 2,000 simulated data sets. The data sets were created using a Monte Carlo method based on an existing data set. Across the simulated data sets, the GEE and the conventional statistical tests generally provided similar patterns of results. As the GEE and more conventional statistical tests provide the same pattern of result, we suggest researchers use the GEE because it was designed to handle data that has the structure that is typical of discounting data. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1002/jeab.497 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2188891880</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2188891880</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3837-f231a2d0af65f0bef3f7740f800c5b3416f152cafbb88039cdfb696d059670183</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kDtPwzAUhS0EoqUg8QuQJRaWFDtuYmcsVXmpiAVmy_GjTZXGre2AysJfx2kLG4t97Pvdo3sPAJcYDTFC6e1Si3I4KugR6OOCsIRQjI9BP5bSJItnD5x5v4yiyGl6CnoE5ZRiQvvgewxfbBM0nAhXW7jSYWEVNNZBaVdr4apmDue60U7U1ZdWUPtQrUTovvWmjcI2HgYb6eZDN91T1NCHWIigjDpouWiqTav9zlVVXtq22RkoEcQ5ODGi9vricA_A-_30bfKYzF4fnibjWSIJIzQxKcEiVUiYPDOo1IYYSkfIMIRkVpIRzg3OUilMWTKGSCGVKfMiVyiLGyPMyABc733XznbDBL60rYvDep5ixliBu74BuNlT0lnvnTZ87eK6bssx4l3SvEuax6QjenUwbMuVVn_gb7QRSPbAZ1Xr7b9G_Hk6vusMfwBWKIo7</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2188891880</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A Monte Carlo method for comparing generalized estimating equations to conventional statistical techniques for discounting data</title><source>Wiley-Blackwell Read & Publish Collection</source><creator>Friedel, Jonathan E. ; DeHart, William B. ; Foreman, Anne M. ; Andrew, Michael E.</creator><creatorcontrib>Friedel, Jonathan E. ; DeHart, William B. ; Foreman, Anne M. ; Andrew, Michael E.</creatorcontrib><description>Discounting is the process by which outcomes lose value. Much of discounting research has focused on differences in the degree of discounting across various groups. This research has relied heavily on conventional null hypothesis significance tests that are familiar to psychologists, such as t‐tests and ANOVAs. As discounting research questions have become more complex by simultaneously focusing on within‐subject and between‐group differences, conventional statistical testing is often not appropriate for the obtained data. Generalized estimating equations (GEE) are one type of mixed‐effects model that are designed to handle autocorrelated data, such as within‐subject repeated‐measures data, and are therefore more appropriate for discounting data. To determine if GEE provides similar results as conventional statistical tests, we compared the techniques across 2,000 simulated data sets. The data sets were created using a Monte Carlo method based on an existing data set. Across the simulated data sets, the GEE and the conventional statistical tests generally provided similar patterns of results. As the GEE and more conventional statistical tests provide the same pattern of result, we suggest researchers use the GEE because it was designed to handle data that has the structure that is typical of discounting data.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-5002</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1938-3711</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/jeab.497</identifier><identifier>PMID: 30677137</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Hoboken, USA: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</publisher><subject>Accidents, Traffic - statistics & numerical data ; Analysis of Variance ; Data Interpretation, Statistical ; Datasets ; Decision Making ; Delay Discounting ; discounting ; generalized estimating equations ; Humans ; Likelihood Functions ; mixed‐effects models ; Models, Statistical ; Monte Carlo ; Monte Carlo Method ; Monte Carlo simulation ; Probability ; Research Design ; Statistical analysis ; Statistics as Topic ; Text Messaging - statistics & numerical data</subject><ispartof>Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 2019-03, Vol.111 (2), p.207-224</ispartof><rights>Published 2019. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.</rights><rights>2019 Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3837-f231a2d0af65f0bef3f7740f800c5b3416f152cafbb88039cdfb696d059670183</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3837-f231a2d0af65f0bef3f7740f800c5b3416f152cafbb88039cdfb696d059670183</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30677137$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Friedel, Jonathan E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DeHart, William B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Foreman, Anne M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Andrew, Michael E.</creatorcontrib><title>A Monte Carlo method for comparing generalized estimating equations to conventional statistical techniques for discounting data</title><title>Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior</title><addtitle>J Exp Anal Behav</addtitle><description>Discounting is the process by which outcomes lose value. Much of discounting research has focused on differences in the degree of discounting across various groups. This research has relied heavily on conventional null hypothesis significance tests that are familiar to psychologists, such as t‐tests and ANOVAs. As discounting research questions have become more complex by simultaneously focusing on within‐subject and between‐group differences, conventional statistical testing is often not appropriate for the obtained data. Generalized estimating equations (GEE) are one type of mixed‐effects model that are designed to handle autocorrelated data, such as within‐subject repeated‐measures data, and are therefore more appropriate for discounting data. To determine if GEE provides similar results as conventional statistical tests, we compared the techniques across 2,000 simulated data sets. The data sets were created using a Monte Carlo method based on an existing data set. Across the simulated data sets, the GEE and the conventional statistical tests generally provided similar patterns of results. As the GEE and more conventional statistical tests provide the same pattern of result, we suggest researchers use the GEE because it was designed to handle data that has the structure that is typical of discounting data.</description><subject>Accidents, Traffic - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Analysis of Variance</subject><subject>Data Interpretation, Statistical</subject><subject>Datasets</subject><subject>Decision Making</subject><subject>Delay Discounting</subject><subject>discounting</subject><subject>generalized estimating equations</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Likelihood Functions</subject><subject>mixed‐effects models</subject><subject>Models, Statistical</subject><subject>Monte Carlo</subject><subject>Monte Carlo Method</subject><subject>Monte Carlo simulation</subject><subject>Probability</subject><subject>Research Design</subject><subject>Statistical analysis</subject><subject>Statistics as Topic</subject><subject>Text Messaging - statistics & numerical data</subject><issn>0022-5002</issn><issn>1938-3711</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kDtPwzAUhS0EoqUg8QuQJRaWFDtuYmcsVXmpiAVmy_GjTZXGre2AysJfx2kLG4t97Pvdo3sPAJcYDTFC6e1Si3I4KugR6OOCsIRQjI9BP5bSJItnD5x5v4yiyGl6CnoE5ZRiQvvgewxfbBM0nAhXW7jSYWEVNNZBaVdr4apmDue60U7U1ZdWUPtQrUTovvWmjcI2HgYb6eZDN91T1NCHWIigjDpouWiqTav9zlVVXtq22RkoEcQ5ODGi9vricA_A-_30bfKYzF4fnibjWSIJIzQxKcEiVUiYPDOo1IYYSkfIMIRkVpIRzg3OUilMWTKGSCGVKfMiVyiLGyPMyABc733XznbDBL60rYvDep5ixliBu74BuNlT0lnvnTZ87eK6bssx4l3SvEuax6QjenUwbMuVVn_gb7QRSPbAZ1Xr7b9G_Hk6vusMfwBWKIo7</recordid><startdate>201903</startdate><enddate>201903</enddate><creator>Friedel, Jonathan E.</creator><creator>DeHart, William B.</creator><creator>Foreman, Anne M.</creator><creator>Andrew, Michael E.</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>K9.</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201903</creationdate><title>A Monte Carlo method for comparing generalized estimating equations to conventional statistical techniques for discounting data</title><author>Friedel, Jonathan E. ; DeHart, William B. ; Foreman, Anne M. ; Andrew, Michael E.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3837-f231a2d0af65f0bef3f7740f800c5b3416f152cafbb88039cdfb696d059670183</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Accidents, Traffic - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Analysis of Variance</topic><topic>Data Interpretation, Statistical</topic><topic>Datasets</topic><topic>Decision Making</topic><topic>Delay Discounting</topic><topic>discounting</topic><topic>generalized estimating equations</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Likelihood Functions</topic><topic>mixed‐effects models</topic><topic>Models, Statistical</topic><topic>Monte Carlo</topic><topic>Monte Carlo Method</topic><topic>Monte Carlo simulation</topic><topic>Probability</topic><topic>Research Design</topic><topic>Statistical analysis</topic><topic>Statistics as Topic</topic><topic>Text Messaging - statistics & numerical data</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Friedel, Jonathan E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DeHart, William B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Foreman, Anne M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Andrew, Michael E.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><jtitle>Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Friedel, Jonathan E.</au><au>DeHart, William B.</au><au>Foreman, Anne M.</au><au>Andrew, Michael E.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A Monte Carlo method for comparing generalized estimating equations to conventional statistical techniques for discounting data</atitle><jtitle>Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior</jtitle><addtitle>J Exp Anal Behav</addtitle><date>2019-03</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>111</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>207</spage><epage>224</epage><pages>207-224</pages><issn>0022-5002</issn><eissn>1938-3711</eissn><abstract>Discounting is the process by which outcomes lose value. Much of discounting research has focused on differences in the degree of discounting across various groups. This research has relied heavily on conventional null hypothesis significance tests that are familiar to psychologists, such as t‐tests and ANOVAs. As discounting research questions have become more complex by simultaneously focusing on within‐subject and between‐group differences, conventional statistical testing is often not appropriate for the obtained data. Generalized estimating equations (GEE) are one type of mixed‐effects model that are designed to handle autocorrelated data, such as within‐subject repeated‐measures data, and are therefore more appropriate for discounting data. To determine if GEE provides similar results as conventional statistical tests, we compared the techniques across 2,000 simulated data sets. The data sets were created using a Monte Carlo method based on an existing data set. Across the simulated data sets, the GEE and the conventional statistical tests generally provided similar patterns of results. As the GEE and more conventional statistical tests provide the same pattern of result, we suggest researchers use the GEE because it was designed to handle data that has the structure that is typical of discounting data.</abstract><cop>Hoboken, USA</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</pub><pmid>30677137</pmid><doi>10.1002/jeab.497</doi><tpages>18</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0022-5002 |
ispartof | Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 2019-03, Vol.111 (2), p.207-224 |
issn | 0022-5002 1938-3711 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2188891880 |
source | Wiley-Blackwell Read & Publish Collection |
subjects | Accidents, Traffic - statistics & numerical data Analysis of Variance Data Interpretation, Statistical Datasets Decision Making Delay Discounting discounting generalized estimating equations Humans Likelihood Functions mixed‐effects models Models, Statistical Monte Carlo Monte Carlo Method Monte Carlo simulation Probability Research Design Statistical analysis Statistics as Topic Text Messaging - statistics & numerical data |
title | A Monte Carlo method for comparing generalized estimating equations to conventional statistical techniques for discounting data |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-24T13%3A00%3A29IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20Monte%20Carlo%20method%20for%20comparing%20generalized%20estimating%20equations%20to%20conventional%20statistical%20techniques%20for%20discounting%20data&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20the%20experimental%20analysis%20of%20behavior&rft.au=Friedel,%20Jonathan%20E.&rft.date=2019-03&rft.volume=111&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=207&rft.epage=224&rft.pages=207-224&rft.issn=0022-5002&rft.eissn=1938-3711&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/jeab.497&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2188891880%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3837-f231a2d0af65f0bef3f7740f800c5b3416f152cafbb88039cdfb696d059670183%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2188891880&rft_id=info:pmid/30677137&rfr_iscdi=true |