RESUMEN
In Bayesian statistics, the most widely used criteria of Bayesian model assessment and comparison are Deviance Information Criterion (DIC) and Watanabe-Akaike Information Criterion (WAIC). We use a multilevel mediation model as an illustrative example to compare different types of DIC and WAIC. More specifically, we aim to compare the performance of conditional and marginal DICs and WAICs, and investigate their performance with missing data. We focus on two versions of DIC ([Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text]) and one version of WAIC. In addition, we explore whether it is necessary to include the nuisance models of incomplete exogenous variables in likelihood. Based on the simulation results, whether [Formula: see text] is better than [Formula: see text] and WAIC and whether we should include the nuisance models of exogenous variables in likelihood functions depend on whether we use marginal or conditional likelihoods. Overall, we find that the marginal likelihood based-[Formula: see text] that excludes the likelihood of covariate models generally had the highest true model selection rates.
RESUMEN
Composite scores are an exceptionally important psychometric tool for behavioral science research applications. A prototypical example occurs with self-report data, where researchers routinely use questionnaires with multiple items that tap into different features of a target construct. Item-level missing data are endemic to composite score applications. Many studies have investigated this issue, and the near-universal theme is that item-level missing data treatment is superior because it maximizes precision and power. However, item-level missing data handling can be challenging because missing data models become very complex and suffer from the same "curse of dimensionality" problem that plagues the estimation of psychometric models. A good deal of recent missing data literature has focused on advancing factored regression specifications that use a sequence of regression models to represent the multivariate distribution of a set of incomplete variables. The purpose of this paper is to describe and evaluate a factored specification for composite scores with incomplete item responses. We used a series of computer simulations to compare the proposed approach to gold standard multiple imputation and latent variable modeling approaches. Overall, the simulation results suggest that this new approach can be very effective, even under extreme conditions where the number of items is very large (or even exceeds) the sample size. A real data analysis illustrates the application of the method using software available on the internet. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).
RESUMEN
Missing data such as data missing at random (MAR) are unavoidable in real data and have the potential to undermine the validity of research results. Multiple imputation is one of the most widely used MAR-based methods in education and behavioral science applications. Arbitrarily specifying imputation models can lead to incompatibility and cause biased estimation. Building on the recent developments of model-based imputation and Arnold's compatibility work, this paper systematically summarizes when the traditional fully conditional specification (FCS) is applicable and how to specify a model-based imputation model if needed. We summarize two Compatibility Requirements to help researchers check compatibility more easily and a decision tree to check whether the traditional FCS is applicable in a given scenario. Additionally, we present a clear overview of two types of model-based imputation: the sequential and separate specifications. We illustrate how to specify model-based imputation with examples. Additionally, we provide example code of a free software program, Blimp, for implementing model-based imputation.