Correcting Measurement Error Bias in Interaction Models with Small Samples

Several methods have been suggested to estimate non-linear models with interaction terms in the presence of measurement error. Structural equation models eliminate measurement error bias, but require large samples. Ordinary least squares regression on summated scales, regression on factor scores and partial least squares are appropriate for small samples but do not correct measurement error bias. Two stage least squares regression does correct measurement error bias but the results strongly depend on the instrumental variable choice. This article discusses the old disattenuated regression method as an alternative for correcting measurement error in small samples. The method is extended to the case of interaction terms and is illustrated on a model that examines the interaction effect of innovation and style of use of budgets on business performance. Alternative reliability estimates that can be used to disattenuate the estimates are discussed. A comparison is made with the alternative methods. Methods that do not correct for measurement error bias perform very similarly and considerably worse than disattenuated regression

Multivariate measurement error models based on scale mixtures of the skew-normal distribution

Scale mixtures of the skew-normal (SMSN) distribution is a class of asymmetric thick-tailed distributions that includes the skew-normal (SN) distribution as a special case. The main advantage of these classes of distributions is that they are easy to simulate and have a nice hierarchical representation facilitating easy implementation of the expectation-maximization algorithm for the maximum-likelihood estimation. In this paper, we assume an SMSN distribution for the unobserved value of the covariates and a symmetric scale mixtures of the normal distribution for the error term of the model. This provides a robust alternative to parameter estimation in multivariate measurement error models. Specific distributions examined include univariate and multivariate versions of the SN, skew-t, skew-slash and skew-contaminated normal distributions. The results and methods are applied to a real data set.

Measurement error models with a general class of error distribution

In general, the normal distribution is assumed for the surrogate of the true covariates in the classical error model. This paper considers a class of distributions, which includes the normal one, for the variables subject to error. An estimation approach yielding consistent estimators is developed and simulation studies reported.

Effect of measurement error and autocorrelation on the (X)over-bar chart

Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)

Inference on Survival Data with Covariate Measurement Error - An Imputation-based Approach

We propose a new method for fitting proportional hazards models with error-prone covariates. Regression coefficients are estimated by solving an estimating equation that is the average of the partial likelihood scores based on imputed true covariates. For the purpose of imputation, a linear spline model is assumed on the baseline hazard. We discuss consistency and asymptotic normality of the resulting estimators, and propose a stochastic approximation scheme to obtain the estimates. The algorithm is easy to implement, and reduces to the ordinary Cox partial likelihood approach when the measurement error has a degenerative distribution. Simulations indicate high efficiency and robustness. We consider the special case where error-prone replicates are available on the unobserved true covariates. As expected, increasing the number of replicate for the unobserved covariates increases efficiency and reduces bias. We illustrate the practical utility of the proposed method with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group clinical trial where a genetic marker, c-myc expression level, is subject to measurement error.

Earnings Management and Measurement Error

In this paper I consider the impact of a noisy indicator regarding a manager’s manipulative behavior on optimal effort incentives and the extent of earnings management. The analysis in this paper extends a twotask, single performance measure LEN model by including a binary random variable. I show that contracting on the noisy indicator variable is not always useful. More specifically, the principal uses the indicator variable to prevent earnings management only under conditions where manipulative behavior is not excessive. Thus, under conditions of excessive earnings management, accounting adjustments that yield a more congruent overall performance measure can be more effective than an appraisal of the existence of earnings management to mitigate the earnings management problem.

Accounting for baseline differences and measurement error in the analysis of change over time

If change over time is compared in several groups, it is important to take into account baseline values so that the comparison is carried out under the same preconditions. As the observed baseline measurements are distorted by measurement error, it may not be sufficient to include them as covariate. By fitting a longitudinal mixed-effects model to all data including the baseline observations and subsequently calculating the expected change conditional on the underlying baseline value, a solution to this problem has been provided recently so that groups with the same baseline characteristics can be compared. In this article, we present an extended approach where a broader set of models can be used. Specifically, it is possible to include any desired set of interactions between the time variable and the other covariates, and also, time-dependent covariates can be included. Additionally, we extend the method to adjust for baseline measurement error of other time-varying covariates. We apply the methodology to data from the Swiss HIV Cohort Study to address the question if a joint infection with HIV-1 and hepatitis C virus leads to a slower increase of CD4 lymphocyte counts over time after the start of antiretroviral therapy.

Moderating effects of management control systems and innovation on performance. Simple methods for correcting the effects of measurement error for interaction effects in small samples

In the accounting literature, interaction or moderating effects are usually assessed by means of OLS regression and summated rating scales are constructed to reduce measurement error bias. Structural equation models and two-stage least squares regression could be used to completely eliminate this bias, but large samples are needed. Partial Least Squares are appropriate for small samples but do not correct measurement error bias. In this article, disattenuated regression is discussed as a small sample alternative and is illustrated on data of Bisbe and Otley (in press) that examine the interaction effect of innovation and style of use of budgets on performance. Sizeable differences emerge between OLS and disattenuated regression

Random measurement error and regression dilution bias.

Summary points: - The bias introduced by random measurement error will be different depending on whether the error is in an exposure variable (risk factor) or outcome variable (disease) - Random measurement error in an exposure variable will bias the estimates of regression slope coefficients towards the null - Random measurement error in an outcome variable will instead increase the standard error of the estimates and widen the corresponding confidence intervals, making results less likely to be statistically significant - Increasing sample size will help minimise the impact of measurement error in an outcome variable but will only make estimates more precisely wrong when the error is in an exposure variable

Measurement Errors Should Always Be Incorporated in Phylogenetic Comparative Analysis

The evolution of continuous traits is the central component of comparative analyses in phylogenetics, and the comparison of alternative models of trait evolution has greatly improved our understanding of the mechanisms driving phenotypic differentiation. Several factors influence the comparison of models, and we explore the effects of random errors in trait measurement on the accuracy of model selection. We simulate trait data under a Brownian motion model (BM) and introduce different magnitudes of random measurement error. We then evaluate the resulting statistical support for this model against two alternative models: Ornstein-Uhlenbeck (OU) and accelerating/decelerating rates (ACDC). Our analyses show that even small measurement errors (10%) consistently bias model selection towards erroneous rejection of BM in favour of more parameter-rich models (most frequently the OU model). Fortunately, methods that explicitly incorporate measurement errors in phylogenetic analyses considerably improve the accuracy of model selection. Our results call for caution in interpreting the results of model selection in comparative analyses, especially when complex models garner only modest additional support. Importantly, as measurement errors occur in most trait data sets, we suggest that estimation of measurement errors should always be performed during comparative analysis to reduce chances of misidentification of evolutionary processes.

Looking for Validity or Testing It? The Perils of Stepwise Regression, Extreme-Scores Analysis, Heteroscedasticity, and Measurement Error

When researchers introduce a new test they have to demonstrate that it is valid, using unbiased designs and suitable statistical procedures. In this article we use Monte Carlo analyses to highlight how incorrect statistical procedures (i.e., stepwise regression, extreme scores analyses) or ignoring regression assumptions (e.g., heteroscedasticity) contribute to wrong validity estimates. Beyond these demonstrations, and as an example, we re-examined the results reported by Warwick, Nettelbeck, and Ward (2010) concerning the validity of the Ability Emotional Intelligence Measure (AEIM). Warwick et al. used the wrong statistical procedures to conclude that the AEIM was incrementally valid beyond intelligence and personality traits in predicting various outcomes. In our re-analysis, we found that the reliability-corrected multiple correlation of their measures with personality and intelligence was up to .69. Using robust statistical procedures and appropriate controls, we also found that the AEIM did not predict incremental variance in GPA, stress, loneliness, or well-being, demonstrating the importance for testing validity instead of looking for it.