On the consequences of misspecifing assumptions concerning residuals distribution in a repeated measures and nonlinear mixed modelling context

In this paper we describe the results of a simulation study performed to elucidate the robustness of the Lindstrom and Bates (1990) approximation method under non-normality of the residuals, under different situations. Concerning the fixed effects, the observed coverage probabilities and the true bias and mean square error values, show that some aspects of this inferential approach are not completely reliable. When the true distribution of the residuals is asymmetrical, the true coverage is markedly lower than the nominal one. The best results are obtained for the skew normal distribution, and not for the normal distribution. On the other hand, the results are partially reversed concerning the random effects. Soybean genotypes data are used to illustrate the methods and to motivate the simulation scenarios

Impact of incorrect assumptions on the covariance structure of random effects and/or residuals in nonlinear mixed models for repeated measures data

In this paper we analyse, using Monte Carlo simulation, the possible consequences of incorrect assumptions on the true structure of the random effects covariance matrix and the true correlation pattern of residuals, over the performance of an estimation method for nonlinear mixed models. The procedure under study is the well known linearization method due to Lindstrom and Bates (1990), implemented in the nlme library of S-Plus and R. Its performance is studied in terms of bias, mean square error (MSE), and true coverage of the associated asymptotic confidence intervals. Ignoring other criteria like the convenience of avoiding over parameterised models, it seems worst to erroneously assume some structure than do not assume any structure when this would be adequate.