In the context of generalized linear models (GLMs), interactions are automatically induced on the natural scale of the data. The conventional approach to measuring effects in GLMs based on significance testing (e.g. the Wald test or using deviance to assess model fit) is not always appropriate. The objective of this paper is to demonstrate the limitations of these conventional approaches and to explore alternative strategies for determining the importance of effects. The paper compares four approaches to determining the importance of effects in the GLM using 1) the Wald statistic, 2) change in deviance (model fitting criteria), 3) Bayesian GLM using vaguely informative priors and 4) Bayesian Model Averaging analysis. The main points in this paper are illustrated using an example study, which examines the risk factors for cyber abuse victimization, and are further examined using a simulation study. Analysis of our example dataset shows that, in terms of a logistic GLM, the conventional methods using the Wald test and the change in deviance can produce results that are difficult to interpret; Bayesian analysis of GLM is a suitable alternative, which is enhanced with prior knowledge about the direction of the effects; and Bayesian Model Averaging (BMA) is especially suited for new areas of research, particularly in the absence of theory. We recommend that social scientists consider including BMA in their standard toolbox for analysis of GLMs.
Non-significant p-values? Strategies to understand and better determine the importance of effects and interactions in logistic regression.
阅读:5
作者:Vakhitova Zarina I, Alston-Knox Clair L
| 期刊: | PLoS One | 影响因子: | 2.600 |
| 时间: | 2018 | 起止号: | 2018 Nov 26; 13(11):e0205076 |
| doi: | 10.1371/journal.pone.0205076 | ||
特别声明
1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。
2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。
3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。
4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。
