↓ Skip to main content

A latent variable model approach to estimating systematic bias in the oversampling method

Overview of attention for article published in Behavior Research Methods, October 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
18 Mendeley
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 latent variable model approach to estimating systematic bias in the oversampling method
Published in
Behavior Research Methods, October 2013
DOI 10.3758/s13428-013-0402-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Katherina K. Hauner, Richard E. Zinbarg, William Revelle

Abstract

The method of oversampling data from a preselected range of a variable's distribution is often applied by researchers who wish to study rare outcomes without substantially increasing sample size. Despite frequent use, however, it is not known whether this method introduces statistical bias due to disproportionate representation of a particular range of data. The present study employed simulated data sets to examine how oversampling introduces systematic bias in effect size estimates (of the relationship between oversampled predictor variables and the outcome variable), as compared with estimates based on a random sample. In general, results indicated that increased oversampling was associated with a decrease in the absolute value of effect size estimates. Critically, however, the actual magnitude of this decrease in effect size estimates was nominal. This finding thus provides the first evidence that the use of the oversampling method does not systematically bias results to a degree that would typically impact results in behavioral research. Examining the effect of sample size on oversampling yielded an additional important finding: For smaller samples, the use of oversampling may be necessary to avoid spuriously inflated effect sizes, which can arise when the number of predictor variables and rare outcomes is comparable.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 6%
Unknown 17 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 22%
Researcher 3 17%
Professor 3 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 11%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 3 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 7 39%
Social Sciences 3 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 11%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 6%
Mathematics 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 22 July 2014.
All research outputs
#20,656,161
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Behavior Research Methods
#1,980
of 2,525 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#169,526
of 224,382 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Behavior Research Methods
#21
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,525 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 224,382 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.