↓ Skip to main content

A solution to dependency: using multilevel analysis to accommodate nested data

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Neuroscience, March 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
3 blogs
twitter
94 X users
patent
1 patent
facebook
2 Facebook pages
reddit
1 Redditor
q&a
2 Q&A threads

Citations

dimensions_citation
488 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
1120 Mendeley
citeulike
5 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A solution to dependency: using multilevel analysis to accommodate nested data
Published in
Nature Neuroscience, March 2014
DOI 10.1038/nn.3648
Pubmed ID
Authors

Emmeke Aarts, Matthijs Verhage, Jesse V Veenvliet, Conor V Dolan, Sophie van der Sluis

Abstract

In neuroscience, experimental designs in which multiple observations are collected from a single research object (for example, multiple neurons from one animal) are common: 53% of 314 reviewed papers from five renowned journals included this type of data. These so-called 'nested designs' yield data that cannot be considered to be independent, and so violate the independency assumption of conventional statistical methods such as the t test. Ignoring this dependency results in a probability of incorrectly concluding that an effect is statistically significant that is far higher (up to 80%) than the nominal α level (usually set at 5%). We discuss the factors affecting the type I error rate and the statistical power in nested data, methods that accommodate dependency between observations and ways to determine the optimal study design when data are nested. Notably, optimization of experimental designs nearly always concerns collection of more truly independent observations, rather than more observations from one research object.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 94 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,120 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 20 2%
United Kingdom 8 <1%
France 6 <1%
Germany 4 <1%
Spain 4 <1%
Brazil 3 <1%
Chile 3 <1%
Australia 3 <1%
Switzerland 3 <1%
Other 23 2%
Unknown 1043 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 296 26%
Researcher 288 26%
Student > Master 104 9%
Student > Bachelor 76 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 69 6%
Other 170 15%
Unknown 117 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 303 27%
Neuroscience 208 19%
Psychology 128 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 93 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 64 6%
Other 158 14%
Unknown 166 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 96. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 April 2023.
All research outputs
#434,731
of 25,292,378 outputs
Outputs from Nature Neuroscience
#795
of 5,599 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,692
of 231,503 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Neuroscience
#5
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,292,378 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,599 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 56.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 231,503 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.