↓ Skip to main content

Constrained statistical inference: sample-size tables for ANOVA and regression

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Readers on

mendeley
53 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
Constrained statistical inference: sample-size tables for ANOVA and regression
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01565
Pubmed ID
Authors

Leonard Vanbrabant, Rens Van De Schoot, Yves Rosseel

Abstract

Researchers in the social and behavioral sciences often have clear expectations about the order/direction of the parameters in their statistical model. For example, a researcher might expect that regression coefficient β1 is larger than β2 and β3. The corresponding hypothesis is H: β1 > {β2, β3} and this is known as an (order) constrained hypothesis. A major advantage of testing such a hypothesis is that power can be gained and inherently a smaller sample size is needed. This article discusses this gain in sample size reduction, when an increasing number of constraints is included into the hypothesis. The main goal is to present sample-size tables for constrained hypotheses. A sample-size table contains the necessary sample-size at a pre-specified power (say, 0.80) for an increasing number of constraints. To obtain sample-size tables, two Monte Carlo simulations were performed, one for ANOVA and one for multiple regression. Three results are salient. First, in an ANOVA the needed sample-size decreases with 30-50% when complete ordering of the parameters is taken into account. Second, small deviations from the imposed order have only a minor impact on the power. Third, at the maximum number of constraints, the linear regression results are comparable with the ANOVA results. However, in the case of fewer constraints, ordering the parameters (e.g., β1 > β2) results in a higher power than assigning a positive or a negative sign to the parameters (e.g., β1 > 0).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Chile 1 2%
Macao 1 2%
United Kingdom 1 2%
Belgium 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 48 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 17%
Student > Master 6 11%
Student > Bachelor 5 9%
Researcher 4 8%
Student > Postgraduate 4 8%
Other 16 30%
Unknown 9 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 20 38%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 9%
Social Sciences 3 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 4%
Unspecified 2 4%
Other 12 23%
Unknown 9 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 30 July 2015.
All research outputs
#5,963,844
of 22,787,797 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#8,454
of 29,702 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#81,093
of 353,128 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#184
of 400 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,787,797 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,702 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 353,128 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 400 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.