The effect of skewness and kurtosis on the robustness of linear mixed models

Behavior Research Methods

Volumn 45, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 873-879

  Arnau, Jaume ^a   Bendayan, Rebecca ^b   Blanca, María J ^b   Bono, Roser ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BARCELONA   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MÁLAGA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Kenward Roger procedure; Kurtosis; Linear mixed model; Robustness; Skewness

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; FEMALE; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; MONTE CARLO METHOD; NORMAL DISTRIBUTION; PROBABILITY; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; REPRODUCIBILITY; SAMPLE SIZE; STATISTICAL MODEL;

FEMALE; HUMANS; LINEAR MODELS; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; MONTE CARLO METHOD; NORMAL DISTRIBUTION; PROBABILITY; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RESEARCH DESIGN; SAMPLE SIZE;

EID: 84881568208     PISSN: 1554351X     EISSN: 15543528     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/s13428-012-0306-x     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Arnau, J., Bono, R., Blanca, M. J., & Bendayan, R. (2012). Using the linear mixed model to analyze non-normal data distributions in longitudinal designs. Behavior Research Methods. doi: 10. 3758/s13428-012-0196-y.
2. Arnau, J., Bono, R., & Vallejo, G. (2009). Analyzing small samples of repeated measures data with the mixed-model adjusted F test. Communications in Statistics. Simulation and Computations, 38, 1083-1103. doi: 10. 1080/03610910902785746.
3. Bendayan, R., Arnau, J., Blanca, M. J., Bono, R., & Alarcón, R. (2011). Dos procedimientos para generar datos no normales (Fleishman vs Ramberg) y cantidad de simulaciones. Estudio comparativo. XII Congreso de Metodología de las Ciencias del Comportamiento. San Sebastian.
4. Berkovits, I., Hancock, G. R., & Nevitt, J. (2000). Bootstrap resampling approaches for repeated measure designs: Relative robustness to sphericity and normality violations. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60(6), 877-892. doi: 10. 1177/00131640021970961.
5. Blanca, M. J., Arnau, J., Bono, R., López-Montiel, D., & Bendayan, R. (2012). Skewness and kurtosis in real data samples. Methodology. European Journal of Research Methods for the Behavioral and Social Sciences. doi: 10. 1027/1614-2241/a000057.
6. Bradley, J. V. (1978). Robustness? British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 31, 144-152. doi: 10. 1111/j. 2044-8317. 1978. tb00581. x.
7. Chafin, W. W., & Rhiel, S. G. (1993). The effect of skewness and kurtosis on the one-sample T test and the impact of knowledge of the population standard deviation. Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation, 46(1-2), 79-90. doi: 10. 1080/00949659308811494.
8. Chen, X., & Wei, L. (2003). A comparison of recent methods for the analysis of small-sample cross-over studies. Statistics in Medicine, 22, 2821-2833. doi: 10. 1002/sim. 1537.
9. Cnaan, A., Laird, N. M., & Slasor, P. (1997). Using the general linear mixed model to analyze unbalanced repeated measures and longitudinal data. Statistics in Medicine, 16, 2349-2380. doi: 10. 1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19971030)16: 20<2349:: AID-SIM667>3. 0. CO;2-E.
10. Fernández, P., Vallejo, G., Livacic-Rojas, P., & Tuero, E. (2010). Características y análisis de los diseños de medidas repetidas en la investigación experimental en España en los últimos 10 años. Actas del XI Congreso de Metodología de las Ciencias del Comportamiento. Málaga.
11. Fleishman, A. (1978). A method for simulating non-normal distributions. Psychometrika, 43(4), 521-531. doi: 10. 1007/BF02293811.
12. Harwell, M. R., Rubinstein, E. N., Hayes, W. S., & Olds, C. C. (1992). Summarizing Monte Carlo results in methodological research: The one and two factors fixed effect ANOVA case. Journal of Educational Statistics, 17, 315-339. doi: 10. 2307/1165127.
13. Hopkins, K. D., & Weeks, D. L. (1990). Test for normality and measures of skewness and kurtosis: Their place in research reporting. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 50, 717-729. doi: 10. 1177/0013164490504001.
14. Jaccard, J., & Ackerman, L. (1985). Repeated measures analysis of means in clinical research. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 53, 426-428. doi: 10. 1037/0022-006X. 53. 3. 426.
15. Kenward, M. G., & Roger, J. H. (1997). Small sample inference for fixed effects from restricted maximum likelihood. Biometrics, 53, 983-997. doi: 10. 2307/2533558.
16. Keselman, H. J., Huberty, C. J., Lix, L. M., Olejnik, S., Cribbie, R. A., Donahue, B., Kowalchuk, R. K., Lowman, L. L., Petoskey, M. D., Keselman, J. C., & Levin, J. R. (1998). Statistical practices of education researchers: An analysis of the ANOVA, MANOVA, and ANCOVA analyses. Review of Educational Research, 68, 350-386.
17. Keselman, J. C., Lix, L. M., & Keselman, H. J. (1996). The analysis of repeated measurements: A quantitative research synthesis. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 49, 275-298. doi: 10. 1111/j. 2044-8317. 1996. tb01089. x.
18. Kowalchuk, R. K., Keselman, H. J., Algina, J., & Wolfinger, R. D. (2004). The analysis of repeated measurements with mixed-model adjusted F tests. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64(2), 224-242. doi: 10. 1177/0013164403260196.
19. Laird, N. M., & Ware, J. H. (1982). Random effects models for longitudinal data. Biometrics, 38, 963-974. doi: 10. 2307/2529876.
20. Lei, M., & Lomax, R. G. (2005). The effect of varying degrees on nonnormality in structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 12, 1-27. doi: 10. 1207/s15328007sem1201_1.
21. Littell, R. C. (2002). Analysis of unbalanced mixed models data: A case study for comparison of ANOVA versus REM/GLS. Journal of Agricultural, Biological, and Environmental Statistics, 7, 472-490. doi: 10. 1198/108571102816.
22. Littell, R. C., Milliken, G. A., Stroup, W. W., & Wolfinger, R. D. (1996). SAS System for mixed models. Cary: SAS Institute Inc.
23. Livacic-Rojas, P., Vallejo, G., & Fernández, P. (2006). Procedimientos estadísticos alternativos para evaluar la robustez mediante diseños de medidas repetidas. Revista Latinoamericana de Psicología, 38(3), 579-598.
24. Livacic-Rojas, P., Vallejo, G., & Fernández, P. (2010). Analysis of Type I error rate of univariate and multivariate procedures in repeated measures designs. Communications in Statistics - Simulation and Computation, 39, 624-640. doi: 10. 1080/03610910903548952.
25. Micceri, T. (1989). The unicorn, the normal curve, and other improbable creatures. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 156-166. doi: 10. 1037/0033-2909. 105. 1. 156.
26. Rogan, J. C., Keselman, H. J., & Mendoza, J. L. (1979). Analysis of repeated measurements. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 32, 269-286. doi: 10. 1111/j. 2044-8317. 1979. tb00598. x.
27. Robey, R. R., & Barcikowski, R. S. (1992). Type I error and the number of iterations in Monte Carlo studies of robustness. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 45, 283-288. doi: 10. 1111/j. 2044-8317. 1992. tb00993. x.
28. SAS Institute Inc. (2008). SAS/STAT 9. 2 user's guide. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.
29. Scheffé, H. (1959). The analyses of variance. New York: Wiley.
30. Vallejo, G., & Ato, M. (2006). Modified Brown-Forsythe procedure for testing interaction effects in split-plot designs. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 41, 549-578. doi: 10. 1207/s15327906mbr4104_6.
31. Vallejo, G., Fernández, P., HerreroF, J., & Conejo, N. M. (2004). Alternative procedures for testing fixed effects in repeated measures designs when assumptions are violated. Psicothema, 16(3), 498-508.
32. Winer, B. J. (1971). Statistical principles in experimental design (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
33. Wright, S. P., & Wolfinger, R. D. (1996). Repeated measures analysis using mixed models: Some simulation results. Conference on Modelling Longitudinal and Spatially Correlated Data: Methods, Applications, and Future Directions. Nantucket, MA.
34. Zimmerman, D. L., & Núñez-antón, V. (2001). Parametric modeling of growth curve data: An overview. TEST, 10, 111-186. doi: 10. 1007/BF02595823.