NotesFAQContact Us
Collection
Advanced
Search Tips
Publication Date
In 20250
Since 20240
Since 2021 (last 5 years)0
Since 2016 (last 10 years)3
Since 2006 (last 20 years)23
Laws, Policies, & Programs
No Child Left Behind Act 20011
Assessments and Surveys
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Showing 1 to 15 of 30 results Save | Export
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Slez, Adam – Sociological Methods & Research, 2019
Young and Holsteen (YH) introduce a number of tools for evaluating model uncertainty. In so doing, they are careful to differentiate their method from existing forms of model averaging. The fundamental difference lies in the way in which the underlying estimates are weighted. Whereas standard approaches to model averaging assign higher weight to…
Descriptors: Research Methodology, Models, Ambiguity (Context), Computation
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Young, Cristobal – Sociological Methods & Research, 2019
The commenter's proposal may be a reasonable method for addressing uncertainty in predictive modeling, where the goal is to predict "y." In a treatment effects framework, where the goal is causal inference by conditioning-on-observables, the commenter's proposal is deeply flawed. The proposal (1) ignores the definition of…
Descriptors: Causal Models, Predictor Variables, Research Methodology, Ambiguity (Context)
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Espedido, Rosei; Du Toit, Wilhelmina – Australian Mathematics Teacher, 2017
The authors of this article strongly advocate for a change to the current Australian model of primary education in order to, among other things, establish the concrete practicalities of systematic mathematics thinking thereby limiting the "re-teaching" time required of secondary school mathematics teachers; bring a clear focus to the…
Descriptors: Foreign Countries, Mathematics Teachers, Teacher Attitudes, Advocacy
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Steele, Joel S.; Ferrer, Emilio – Multivariate Behavioral Research, 2011
This article presents our response to Oud and Folmer's "Modeling Oscillation, Approximately or Exactly?" (2011), which criticizes aspects of our article, "Latent Differential Equation Modeling of Self-Regulatory and Coregulatory Affective Processes" (2011). In this response, we present a conceptual explanation of the derivative-based estimation…
Descriptors: Calculus, Responses, Simulation, Models
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Oud, Johan H. L.; Folmer, Henk – Multivariate Behavioral Research, 2011
This article addresses modeling oscillation in continuous time. It criticizes Steele and Ferrer's article "Latent Differential Equation Modeling of Self-Regulatory and Coregulatory Affective Processes" (2011), particularly the approximate estimation procedure applied. This procedure is the latent version of the local linear approximation procedure…
Descriptors: Structural Equation Models, Computation, Calculus, Simulation
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Mooijaart, Ab; Satorra, Albert – Psychometrika, 2012
Starting with Kenny and Judd ("Psychol. Bull." 96:201-210, 1984) several methods have been introduced for analyzing models with interaction terms. In all these methods more information from the data than just means and covariances is required. In this paper we also use more than just first- and second-order moments; however, we are aiming to…
Descriptors: Structural Equation Models, Computation, Goodness of Fit, Statistical Analysis
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Edwards, Michael C. – Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 2013
This author has had the privilege of knowing Professor Maydeu-Olivares for almost a decade and although their paths cross only occasionally, such instances were always enjoyable and enlightening. Edwards states that Maydeu-Olivares' target article for this issue, ("Goodness-of-Fit Assessment of Item Response Theory Models") provides…
Descriptors: Goodness of Fit, Item Response Theory, Models, Factor Analysis
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Chatham, Christopher H.; Yerys, Benjamin E.; Munakata, Yuko – Cognitive Development, 2012
Computational models are powerful tools--too powerful, according to some. We argue that the idea that models can "do anything" is wrong, and we describe how their failures have been informative. We present new work showing surprising diversity in the effects of feedback on children's task-switching, such that some children perseverate despite this…
Descriptors: Failure, Computation, Models, Neurology
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
McLachlan, Geoffrey J. – Psychological Methods, 2011
I discuss the recommendations and cautions in Steinley and Brusco's (2011) article on the use of finite models to cluster a data set. In their article, much use is made of comparison with the "K"-means procedure. As noted by researchers for over 30 years, the "K"-means procedure can be viewed as a special case of finite mixture modeling in which…
Descriptors: Computation, Multivariate Analysis, Matrices, Statistical Analysis
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Starns, Jeffrey J.; Rotello, Caren M.; Ratcliff, Roger – Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 2012
Koen and Yonelinas (2010; K&Y) reported that mixing classes of targets that had short (weak) or long (strong) study times had no impact on zROC slope, contradicting the predictions of the encoding variability hypothesis. We show that they actually derived their predictions from a mixture unequal-variance signal detection (UVSD) model, which…
Descriptors: Evidence, Prediction, Study Habits, Models
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Drummond, Gordon B.; Vowler, Sarah L. – Advances in Physiology Education, 2012
Most biological scientists conduct experiments to look for effects, and test the results statistically. One of the commonly used test is Student's t test. However, this test concentrates on a very limited question. The authors assume that there is no effect in the experiment, and then estimate the possibility that they could have obtained these…
Descriptors: Statistical Significance, Scientists, Tests, Biology
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Rindskopf, David – Psychological Methods, 2012
Muthen and Asparouhov (2012) made a strong case for the advantages of Bayesian methodology in factor analysis and structural equation models. I show additional extensions and adaptations of their methods and show how non-Bayesians can take advantage of many (though not all) of these advantages by using interval restrictions on parameters. By…
Descriptors: Structural Equation Models, Bayesian Statistics, Factor Analysis, Computation
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Fiedler, Klaus; Kareev, Yaakov – Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 2011
On the basis of earlier findings, we (Fiedler & Kareev, 2006) presented a statistical decision model that explains the conditions under which small samples of information about choice alternatives inform more correct choices than large samples. Such a small-sample advantage (SSA) is predicted for choices, not estimations. It is contingent on high…
Descriptors: Sample Size, Information Theory, Prediction, Selection
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
MacCallum, Robert C.; Edwards, Michael C.; Cai, Li – Psychological Methods, 2012
Muthen and Asparouhov (2012) have proposed and demonstrated an approach to model specification and estimation in structural equation modeling (SEM) using Bayesian methods. Their contribution builds on previous work in this area by (a) focusing on the translation of conventional SEM models into a Bayesian framework wherein parameters fixed at zero…
Descriptors: Structural Equation Models, Bayesian Statistics, Computation, Expertise
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Pan, Tianshu; Yin, Yue – Psychological Methods, 2012
In the discussion of mean square difference (MSD) and standard error of measurement (SEM), Barchard (2012) concluded that the MSD between 2 sets of test scores is greater than 2(SEM)[superscript 2] and SEM underestimates the score difference between 2 tests when the 2 tests are not parallel. This conclusion has limitations for 2 reasons. First,…
Descriptors: Error of Measurement, Geometric Concepts, Tests, Structural Equation Models
Previous Page | Next Page ยป
Pages: 1  |  2