Abstract
Inferential research commonly involves identification of causal factors from within high dimensional data but selection of the 'correct' variables can be problematic. One specific problem is that results vary depending on statistical method employed and it has been argued that triangulation of multiple methods is advantageous to safely identify the correct, important variables. To date, no formal method of triangulation has been reported that incorporates both model stability and coefficient estimates; in this paper we develop an adaptable, straightforward method to achieve this. Six methods of variable selection were evaluated using simulated datasets of different dimensions with known underlying relationships. We used a bootstrap methodology to combine stability matrices across methods and estimate aggregated coefficient distributions. Novel graphical approaches provided a transparent route to visualise and compare results between methods. The proposed aggregated method provides a flexible route to formally triangulate results across any chosen number of variable selection methods and provides a combined result that incorporates uncertainty arising from between-method variability. In these simulated datasets, the combined method generally performed as well or better than the individual methods, with low error rates and clearer demarcation of the true causal variables than for the individual methods.