s-news
[Top] [All Lists]

lme question shortened

To: s-news@lists.biostat.wustl.edu
Subject: lme question shortened
From: Gabriel Baud-Bovy <gabriel@shaker.med.umn.edu>
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 13:58:19 +0200
I have posted some questions about the mixed model approach for
a repeated-measure design last week. The post was probably too 
long for most people. I can summarize the previous post into 
two short questions. I would greatly appreciate your comments 
and I'll post a summary of the responses.

1) how to use lme() when the random effect is not statistically
significant but the interaction between the fixed and random
factors is significant?

2) how to use lme() when the residual variance depends in an 
ADDITIVE manner from the levels of the fixed effect AND from 
the levels of the random effect?

I give a little bit more of details and motive these questions
below.  Let assume that I have a repeated measures design with 
eight subjects (su factor) who perform a task in four different 
conditions (plane factor). Each conditon is presented six times 
to each subject in a randomized order (6 replications). 

1) With respect to the first question, the most common examples 
involving an interaction I have seen in books were modeled
with a two-level random effects model:

lme(response~plane,random=~1|su/plane,data) 

but what if var(su)~0 and I would like to simplify
the model ? One possibility is:

data$grp<-factor(paste(data$su,data$plane)
lme(response~plane,random=~1|grp,data)

In that case, is the following correct

lme(response~plane,random=list(grp=pdDiag(form=~plane)),data)

if the variance depends on the level of plane? A LRT test
with my dataset shows marked improvement with respect to the 
previous model but there are many zeros in ranefs() and the 
corresponding qqnorm plots look strange because of these zeros.

2) With respect to the second questions. I know two methods
with the weights argument:

        weights=varComb(varIdent(form=~1|plane),varIdent(form=~1|su))
or
        weights=varIdent(form=~1|plane*su)           

but the first one multiplies and not add the variances and the
second one define a parameters for each combination of levels. I
have looked at the varComb function as a guide to program a new 
set of functions to implement the desired behavior but I could not 
find which function actually carries out the multiplication of 
the variance during the fit of the model. 

Gabriel Baud-Bovy


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • lme question shortened, Gabriel Baud-Bovy <=