IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/testjl/v32y2023i1d10.1007_s11749-022-00830-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Correct specification of design matrices in linear mixed effects models: tests with graphical representation

Author

Listed:
  • Jakob Peterlin

    (University of Ljubljana)

  • Nataša Kejžar

    (University of Ljubljana)

  • Rok Blagus

    (University of Ljubljana)

Abstract

Linear mixed effects models (LMMs) are a popular and powerful tool for analysing grouped or repeated observations for numeric outcomes. LMMs consist of a fixed and a random component, which are specified in the model through their respective design matrices. Verifying the correct specification of the two design matrices is important since mis-specifying them can affect the validity and efficiency of the analysis. We show how to use empirical stochastic processes constructed from appropriately ordered and standardized residuals from the model to test whether the design matrices of the fitted LMM are correctly specified. We define two different processes: one can be used to test whether both design matrices are correctly specified, and the other can be used only to test whether the fixed effects design matrix is correctly specified. The proposed empirical stochastic processes are smoothed versions of cumulative sum processes, which have a nice graphical representation in which model mis-specification can easily be observed. The amount of smoothing can be adjusted, which facilitates visual inspection and can potentially increase the power of the tests. We propose a computationally efficient procedure for estimating p-values in which refitting of the LMM is not necessary. Its validity is shown by using theoretical results and a large Monte Carlo simulation study. The proposed methodology could be used with LMMs with multilevel or crossed random effects.

Suggested Citation

  • Jakob Peterlin & Nataša Kejžar & Rok Blagus, 2023. "Correct specification of design matrices in linear mixed effects models: tests with graphical representation," TEST: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 32(1), pages 184-210, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:testjl:v:32:y:2023:i:1:d:10.1007_s11749-022-00830-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s11749-022-00830-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11749-022-00830-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11749-022-00830-1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zhiying Pan & D. Y. Lin, 2005. "Goodness-of-Fit Methods for Generalized Linear Mixed Models," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 61(4), pages 1000-1009, December.
    2. Andreas Hagemann, 2017. "Cluster-Robust Bootstrap Inference in Quantile Regression Models," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 112(517), pages 446-456, January.
    3. Gerda Claeskens & Jeffrey Hart, 2009. "Rejoinder on: Goodness-of-fit tests in mixed models," TEST: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 18(2), pages 265-270, August.
    4. Diebolt, Jean & Zuber, Jacques, 1999. "Goodness-of-fit tests for nonlinear heteroscedastic regression models," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 53-60, March.
    5. Mahbubul Majumder & Heike Hofmann & Dianne Cook, 2013. "Validation of Visual Statistical Inference, Applied to Linear Models," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 108(503), pages 942-956, September.
    6. Fan J. & Huang L-S., 2001. "Goodness-of-Fit Tests for Parametric Regression Models," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 96, pages 640-652, June.
    7. Gonzales-Manteiga, Wenceslao & Martinez-Miranda, Maria Dolores & Van Keilegom, Ingrid, 2016. "Goodness-of-fit test in parametric mixed effects models based on estimation of the error distribution," LIDAM Reprints ISBA 2016010, Université catholique de Louvain, Institute of Statistics, Biostatistics and Actuarial Sciences (ISBA).
    8. Simon N. Wood, 2013. "A simple test for random effects in regression models," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 100(4), pages 1005-1010.
    9. D. Y. Lin & L. J. Wei & Z. Ying, 2002. "Model-Checking Techniques Based on Cumulative Residuals," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 58(1), pages 1-12, March.
    10. He, Xuming & Shao, Qi-Man, 2000. "On Parameters of Increasing Dimensions," Journal of Multivariate Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 120-135, April.
    11. Wenceslao González-Manteiga & María Dolores Martínez-Miranda & Ingrid Van Keilegom, 2016. "Goodness-of-fit test in parametric mixed effects models based on estimation of the error distribution," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 103(1), pages 133-146.
    12. B. N. Sánchez & E. A. Houseman & L. M. Ryan, 2009. "Residual-Based Diagnostics for Structural Equation Models," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 65(1), pages 104-115, March.
    13. Christian Ritz, 2004. "Goodness‐of‐fit Tests for Mixed Models," Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, Danish Society for Theoretical Statistics;Finnish Statistical Society;Norwegian Statistical Association;Swedish Statistical Association, vol. 31(3), pages 443-458, September.
    14. Ronald Christensen & Yong Lin, 2015. "Lack-of-fit Tests Based On Partial Sums of Residuals," Communications in Statistics - Theory and Methods, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(13), pages 2862-2880, July.
    15. Peng, Heng & Lu, Ying, 2012. "Model selection in linear mixed effect models," Journal of Multivariate Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 109-129.
    16. Tang, Min & Slud, Eric V. & Pfeiffer, Ruth M., 2014. "Goodness of fit tests for linear mixed models," Journal of Multivariate Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 176-193.
    17. Oliver E. Lee & Thomas M. Braun, 2012. "Permutation Tests for Random Effects in Linear Mixed Models," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 68(2), pages 486-493, June.
    18. Gerda Claeskens & Jeffrey Hart, 2009. "Goodness-of-fit tests in mixed models," TEST: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 18(2), pages 213-239, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gonzales Manteiga, Wenceslao & Maria Dolores, Martinez Miranda & Van Keilegom, Ingrid, 2012. "Goodness-of-fit Test in Parametric Mixed-Effects Models based on the Estimation of the Error Distribution," LIDAM Discussion Papers ISBA 2012022, Université catholique de Louvain, Institute of Statistics, Biostatistics and Actuarial Sciences (ISBA).
    2. Tang, Min & Slud, Eric V. & Pfeiffer, Ruth M., 2014. "Goodness of fit tests for linear mixed models," Journal of Multivariate Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 176-193.
    3. Shun Yu & Xianzheng Huang, 2017. "Random-intercept misspecification in generalized linear mixed models for binary responses," Statistical Methods & Applications, Springer;Società Italiana di Statistica, vol. 26(3), pages 333-359, August.
    4. Reza Drikvandi & Geert Verbeke & Geert Molenberghs, 2017. "Diagnosing misspecification of the random-effects distribution in mixed models," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 73(1), pages 63-71, March.
    5. Wenceslao González-Manteiga & Rosa Crujeiras, 2013. "An updated review of Goodness-of-Fit tests for regression models," TEST: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 22(3), pages 361-411, September.
    6. Zhenzhen Zhang & Thomas M. Braun & Karen E. Peterson & Howard Hu & Martha M. Téllez-Rojo & Brisa N. Sánchez, 2018. "Extending Tests of Random Effects to Assess for Measurement Invariance in Factor Models," Statistics in Biosciences, Springer;International Chinese Statistical Association, vol. 10(3), pages 634-650, December.
    7. Yanyuan Ma & Jeffrey D. Hart & Ryan Janicki & Raymond J. Carroll, 2011. "Local and omnibus goodness‐of‐fit tests in classical measurement error models," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 73(1), pages 81-98, January.
    8. E. Deschepper & O. Thas & J. P. Ottoy, 2008. "Tests and Diagnostic Plots for Detecting Lack‐of‐Fit for Circular‐Linear Regression Models," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 64(3), pages 912-920, September.
    9. Jan-Michael Becker & Christian Ringle & Marko Sarstedt & Franziska Völckner, 2015. "How collinearity affects mixture regression results," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 643-659, December.
    10. Zhang, Jun & Li, Gaorong & Feng, Zhenghui, 2015. "Checking the adequacy for a distortion errors-in-variables parametric regression model," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 52-64.
    11. Cadirci, Mehmet Siddik & Evans, Dafydd & Leonenko, Nikolai & Makogin, Vitalii, 2022. "Entropy-based test for generalised Gaussian distributions," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    12. Bao, Junshu & Hanson, Timothy E., 2016. "A mean-constrained finite mixture of normals model," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 93-99.
    13. Crainiceanu, Ciprian M. & Ruppert, David, 2004. "Likelihood ratio tests for goodness-of-fit of a nonlinear regression model," Journal of Multivariate Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 91(1), pages 35-52, October.
    14. Wang, Jiangyan & Gu, Lijie & Yang, Lijian, 2022. "Oracle-efficient estimation for functional data error distribution with simultaneous confidence band," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    15. Shun Yu & Xianzheng Huang, 2019. "Link misspecification in generalized linear mixed models with a random intercept for binary responses," TEST: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 28(3), pages 827-843, September.
    16. González Manteiga, Wenceslao & Lombardía, María José & Martínez Miranda, María Dolores & Sperlich, Stefan, 2013. "Kernel smoothers and bootstrapping for semiparametric mixed effects models," Journal of Multivariate Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 288-302.
    17. Cui, Li-E & Zhao, Puying & Tang, Niansheng, 2022. "Generalized empirical likelihood for nonsmooth estimating equations with missing data," Journal of Multivariate Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    18. Stefan Sperlich, 2013. "Comments on: An updated review of Goodness-of-Fit tests for regression models," TEST: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 22(3), pages 419-427, September.
    19. Kuo-Chin Lin & Yi-Ju Chen, 2016. "Goodness-of-fit tests of generalized linear mixed models for repeated ordinal responses," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(11), pages 2053-2064, August.
    20. Miller, Forrest R. & Neill, James W., 2016. "Lack of fit tests for linear regression models with many predictor variables using minimal weighted maximal matchings," Journal of Multivariate Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 14-26.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:testjl:v:32:y:2023:i:1:d:10.1007_s11749-022-00830-1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.