The metafor Package

A Meta-Analysis Package for R

User Tools

Site Tools


tips:comp_two_independent_estimates

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision
Previous revision
Next revisionBoth sides next revision
tips:comp_two_independent_estimates [2020/07/03 10:28] Wolfgang Viechtbauertips:comp_two_independent_estimates [2021/05/04 11:06] Wolfgang Viechtbauer
Line 113: Line 113:
 Signif. codes:  0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1 Signif. codes:  0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1
 </code> </code>
-The result is very similar to what we saw earlier: The coefficient for the ''alloc'' dummy is equal to $b_1 = -0.490$ ($SE = 0.362$) and not significant ($p = .176$).+The result is very similar to what we saw earlier: The coefficient corresponding to the ''alloc'' dummy is equal to $b_1 = -0.490$ ($SE = 0.362$) and not significant ($p = .176$).
  
 However, the results are not exactly identical. The reason for this is as follows. When we fit separate random-effects models in the two subsets, we are allowing the amount of heterogeneity within each set to be different (as shown earlier, the estimates were $\hat{\tau}^2 = 0.393$ and $\hat{\tau}^2 = 0.212$ for studies using and not using random assignment, respectively). On the other hand, the mixed-effects meta-regression model fitted above has a single variance component for the amount of residual heterogeneity, which implies that the amount of heterogeneity //within each subset// is assumed to be the same ($\hat{\tau}^2 = 0.318$ in this example). However, the results are not exactly identical. The reason for this is as follows. When we fit separate random-effects models in the two subsets, we are allowing the amount of heterogeneity within each set to be different (as shown earlier, the estimates were $\hat{\tau}^2 = 0.393$ and $\hat{\tau}^2 = 0.212$ for studies using and not using random assignment, respectively). On the other hand, the mixed-effects meta-regression model fitted above has a single variance component for the amount of residual heterogeneity, which implies that the amount of heterogeneity //within each subset// is assumed to be the same ($\hat{\tau}^2 = 0.318$ in this example).
Line 154: Line 154:
 A discussion/comparison of these two approaches (i.e., assuming a single $\tau^2$ value or allowing $\tau^2$ to differ across subsets) can be found in the following article: A discussion/comparison of these two approaches (i.e., assuming a single $\tau^2$ value or allowing $\tau^2$ to differ across subsets) can be found in the following article:
  
-Rubio-Aparicio, M., López-López, J. A., Viechtbauer, W., Marín-Martínez, F., Botella, J., & Sánchez-Meca, J. (in press). A comparison of hypothesis tests for categorical moderators in meta-analysis using mixed-effects models. //Journal of Experimental Education//. [[https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00220973.2018.1561404|[Link]]]+Rubio-Aparicio, M., López-López, J. A., Viechtbauer, W., Marín-Martínez, F., Botella, J., & Sánchez-Meca, J. (2020). Testing categorical moderators in mixed-effects meta-analysis in the presence of heteroscedasticity. //Journal of Experimental Education, 88//(2), 288-310. [[https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2018.1561404]]
  
 We can also do a likelihood ratio test (LRT) to examine whether there are significant differences in the $\tau^2$ values across subsets. This can be done with: We can also do a likelihood ratio test (LRT) to examine whether there are significant differences in the $\tau^2$ values across subsets. This can be done with:
tips/comp_two_independent_estimates.txt · Last modified: 2024/04/18 11:36 by Wolfgang Viechtbauer