search for: 0.11962

Displaying 2 results from an estimated 2 matches for "0.11962".

Did you mean: 0.1196
2006 Dec 31
0
(no subject)
> > If one compares the random effect estimates, in fact, one sees that > > they are in the correct proportion, with the expected signs. They are > > just approximately eight orders of magnitude too small. Is this a bug? > > BLUPs are essentially shrinkage estimates, where shrinkage is > determined with magnitude of variance. Lower variance more > shrinkage towards
2006 Dec 31
7
zero random effect sizes with binomial lmer
I am fitting models to the responses to a questionnaire that has seven yes/no questions (Item). For each combination of Subject and Item, the variable Response is coded as 0 or 1. I want to include random effects for both Subject and Item. While I understand that the datasets are fairly small, and there are a lot of invariant subjects, I do not understand something that is happening