Accounting for uncertainty in ecological analysis: the strengths and limitations of hierarchical statistical modeling

Analyses of ecological data should account for the uncertainty in the process(es) that generated the data. However, accounting for these uncertainties is a difficult task, since ecology is known for its complexity. Measurement and/or process errors are often the only sources of uncertainty modeled when addressing complex ecological problems, yet analyses should also account for uncertainty in sampling design, in model specification, in parameters governing the specified model, and in initial and boundary conditions. Only then can we be confident in the scientific inferences and forecasts made from an analysis. Probability and statistics provide a framework that accounts for multiple sources of uncertainty. Given the complexities of ecological studies, the hierarchical statistical model is an invaluable tool. This approach is not new in ecology, and there are many examples (both Bayesian and non-Bayesian) in the literature illustrating the benefits of this approach. In this article, we provide a baseline for concepts, notation, and methods, from which discussion on hierarchical statistical modeling in ecology can proceed. We have also planted some seeds for discussion and tried to show where the practical difficulties lie. Our thesis is that hierarchical statistical modeling is a powerful way of approaching ecological analysis in the presence of inevitable but quantifiable uncertainties, even if practical issues sometimes require pragmatic compromises.

Stability in The Proportion of Harbor Seals Hauled Out Under Locally Ideal Conditions

We monitored the haul-out behavior of 68 radio-tagged harbor seals (Phoca vitulina) during the molt season at two Alaskan haul-out sites (Grand Island, August-September 1994; Nanvak Bay, August-September 2000). For each site, we created a statistical model of the proportion of seals hauled out as a function of date, time of day, tide, and weather covariates. Using these models, we identified the conditions that would result in the greatest proportion of seals hauled out. Although those “ideal conditions” differed between sites, the proportion of seals predicted to be hauled out under those conditions was very similar (81.3% for Grand Island and 85.7% for Nanvak Bay). The similar estimates for both sites suggest that haul-out proportions under locally ideal conditions may be constant between years and geographic regions, at least during the molt season.

Spatial statistical models that use flow and stream distance

We develop spatial statistical models for stream networks that can estimate relationships between a response variable and other covariates, make predictions at unsampled locations, and predict an average or total for a stream or a stream segment. There have been very few attempts to develop valid spatial covariance models that incorporate flow, stream distance, or both. The application of typical spatial autocovariance functions based on Euclidean distance, such as the spherical covariance model, are not valid when using stream distance. In this paper we develop a large class of valid models that incorporate flow and stream distance by using spatial moving averages. These methods integrate a moving average function, or kernel, against a white noise process. By running the moving average function upstream from a location, we develop models that use flow, and by construction they are valid models based on stream distance. We show that with proper weighting, many of the usual spatial models based on Euclidean distance have a counterpart for stream networks. Using sulfate concentrations from an example data set, the Maryland Biological Stream Survey (MBSS), we show that models using flow may be more appropriate than models that only use stream distance. For the MBSS data set, we use restricted maximum likelihood to fit a valid covariance matrix that uses flow and stream distance, and then we use this covariance matrix to estimate fixed effects and make kriging and block kriging predictions.

A Model-Based Approach for Making Ecological Inference from Distance Sampling Data

We consider a fully model-based approach for the analysis of distance sampling data. Distance sampling has been widely used to estimate abundance (or density) of animals or plants in a spatially explicit study area. There is, however, no readily available method of making statistical inference on the relationships between abundance and environmental covariates. Spatial Poisson process likelihoods can be used to simultaneously estimate detection and intensity parameters by modeling distance sampling data as a thinned spatial point process. A model-based spatial approach to distance sampling data has three main benefits: it allows complex and opportunistic transect designs to be employed, it allows estimation of abundance in small subregions, and it provides a framework to assess the effects of habitat or experimental manipulation on density. We demonstrate the model-based methodology with a small simulation study and analysis of the Dubbo weed data set. In addition, a simple ad hoc method for handling overdispersion is also proposed. The simulation study showed that the model-based approach compared favorably to conventional distance sampling methods for abundance estimation. In addition, the overdispersion correction performed adequately when the number of transects was high. Analysis of the Dubbo data set indicated a transect effect on abundance via Akaike’s information criterion model selection. Further goodness-of-fit analysis, however, indicated some potential confounding of intensity with the detection function.

Evaluating Measurement Invariance with Censored Ordinal Data: A Monte Carlo Comparison of Alternative Model Estimators and Scales of Measurement

Evaluations of measurement invariance provide essential construct validity evidence. However, the quality of such evidence is partly dependent upon the validity of the resulting statistical conclusions. The presence of Type I or Type II errors can render measurement invariance conclusions meaningless. The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of categorization and censoring on the behavior of the chi-square/likelihood ratio test statistic and two alternative fit indices (CFI and RMSEA) under the context of evaluating measurement invariance. Monte Carlo simulation was used to examine Type I error and power rates for the (a) overall test statistic/fit indices, and (b) change in test statistic/fit indices. Data were generated according to a multiple-group single-factor CFA model across 40 conditions that varied by sample size, strength of item factor loadings, and categorization thresholds. Seven different combinations of model estimators (ML, Yuan-Bentler scaled ML, and WLSMV) and specified measurement scales (continuous, censored, and categorical) were used to analyze each of the simulation conditions. As hypothesized, non-normality increased Type I error rates for the continuous scale of measurement and did not affect error rates for the categorical scale of measurement. Maximum likelihood estimation combined with a categorical scale of measurement resulted in more correct statistical conclusions than the other analysis combinations. For the continuous and censored scales of measurement, the Yuan-Bentler scaled ML resulted in more correct conclusions than normal-theory ML. The censored measurement scale did not offer any advantages over the continuous measurement scale. Comparing across fit statistics and indices, the chi-square-based test statistics were preferred over the alternative fit indices, and ΔRMSEA was preferred over ΔCFI. Results from this study should be used to inform the modeling decisions of applied researchers. However, no single analysis combination can be recommended for all situations. Therefore, it is essential that researchers consider the context and purpose of their analyses.