Skip to content
Prev 16132 / 20628 Next

Specifying the correct LMM for 'unsual' data

Hi Tom,

your suggestions for the categorical predictors make sense and are
conceptually a much better solution than collapsing everything into a
single predictor - many thanks for that!

I am aware of the partial pooling/shrinkage in the estimation process,
although for your suggestion there would literally be no data for the
VS-miss-condition. And I think that, in this case, the estimation would be
based on the younger children given that there are clearly more missing
data points for older children.

With my second question I was referring to the MAR (missing at random)
assumption of mixed models: "missing data on a given variable
may depend on other observed information, but does not depend on the data
that would have been observed but were in fact missing" (West, Welch &
Galecki, 2015).
I have read that including covariates which 'predict' the nonavailability
of data points should be included (but, to be honest, I have no idea how
this helps with the missing data) and wonder if the inclusion of say number
of hits (if this is a better predictor than age_group) would improve the
model.

Best,
Maarten

On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 4:08 PM, Tom Fritzsche <tom.fritzsche at uni-potsdam.de