IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/somere/v39y2010i2p188-205.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Proportional Reduction of Prediction Error in Cross-Classified Random Effects Models

Author

Listed:
  • Wen Luo

    (University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA, luo@uwm.edu)

  • Oi-Man Kwok

    (Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA)

Abstract

As an extension of hierarchical linear models (HLMs), cross-classified random effects models (CCREMs) are used for analyzing multilevel data that do not have strictly hierarchical structures. Proportional reduction in prediction error, a multilevel version of the R 2 in ordinary multiple regression, measures the predictive ability of a model and is useful in model selection. However, such a measure is not yet available for CCREMs. Using a two-level random-intercept CCREM, the authors have investigated how the estimated variance components change when predictors are added and have extended the measures of proportional reduction in prediction error from HLMs to CCREMs. The extended measures are generally unbiased for both balanced and unbalanced designs. An example is provided to illustrate the computation and interpretation of these measures in CCREMs.

Suggested Citation

  • Wen Luo & Oi-Man Kwok, 2010. "Proportional Reduction of Prediction Error in Cross-Classified Random Effects Models," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 39(2), pages 188-205, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:somere:v:39:y:2010:i:2:p:188-205
    DOI: 10.1177/0049124110384062
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0049124110384062
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0049124110384062?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sudha Mani & Kersi D. Antia & Aric Rindfleisch, 2007. "Entry mode and equity level: A multilevel examination of foreign direct investment ownership structure," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(8), pages 857-866, August.
    2. Upali W. Jayasinghe & Herbert W. Marsh & Nigel Bond, 2003. "A multilevel cross‐classified modelling approach to peer review of grant proposals: the effects of assessor and researcher attributes on assessor ratings," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 166(3), pages 279-300, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Stephen A Gallo & Afton S Carpenter & Scott R Glisson, 2013. "Teleconference versus Face-to-Face Scientific Peer Review of Grant Application: Effects on Review Outcomes," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(8), pages 1-9, August.
    2. Albert Banal-Estañol & Qianshuo Liu & Inés Macho-Stadler & David Pérez-Castrillo, 2021. "Similar-to-me Effects in the Grant Application Process: Applicants, Panelists, and the Likelihood of Obtaining Funds," Working Papers 1289, Barcelona School of Economics.
    3. Patrícia Martinková & Dan Goldhaber & Elena Erosheva, 2018. "Disparities in ratings of internal and external applicants: A case for model-based inter-rater reliability," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(10), pages 1-17, October.
    4. David G Pina & Darko Hren & Ana Marušić, 2015. "Peer Review Evaluation Process of Marie Curie Actions under EU’s Seventh Framework Programme for Research," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(6), pages 1-15, June.
    5. Qing Xie & Hua Yin, 2023. "Institutional Differences and the Choice of Outward Foreign Direct Investment Mode under the “Belt and Road” Initiative: Experience Analysis Based on China’s Manufacturing Enterprises," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-26, April.
    6. Manuel Bagues & Mauro Sylos-Labini & Natalia Zinovyeva, 2017. "Does the Gender Composition of Scientific Committees Matter?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(4), pages 1207-1238, April.
    7. Likitwongkajon, Napaporn & Vithessonthi, Chaiporn, 2020. "Do foreign investments increase firm value and firm performance? Evidence from Japan," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 51(C).
    8. Yuetong Chen & Hao Wang & Baolong Zhang & Wei Zhang, 2022. "A method of measuring the article discriminative capacity and its distribution," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(6), pages 3317-3341, June.
    9. Stephen A Gallo & Joanne H Sullivan & Scott R Glisson, 2016. "The Influence of Peer Reviewer Expertise on the Evaluation of Research Funding Applications," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(10), pages 1-18, October.
    10. Mario Paolucci & Francisco Grimaldo, 2014. "Mechanism change in a simulation of peer review: from junk support to elitism," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 99(3), pages 663-688, June.
    11. Yong Yang & Pedro S. Martins & Nigel Driffield, 2013. "Multinational Performance and the Geography of FDI," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 53(6), pages 763-794, December.
    12. Hu, Tiancheng & Guo, Rui & Ning, Lutao, 2022. "Intangible assets and foreign ownership in international joint ventures: The moderating role of related and unrelated industrial agglomeration," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    13. George Peng & Paul Beamish, 2014. "The effect of host country long term orientation on subsidiary ownership and survival," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 31(2), pages 423-453, June.
    14. Sena, Vania & Duygun, Meryem & Lubrano, Giuseppe & Marra, Marianna & Shaban, Mohamed, 2018. "Board independence, corruption and innovation. Some evidence on UK subsidiaries," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 22-43.
    15. Marsh, Herbert W. & Jayasinghe, Upali W. & Bond, Nigel W., 2011. "Gender differences in peer reviews of grant applications: A substantive-methodological synergy in support of the null hypothesis model," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 167-180.
    16. Bornmann, Lutz & Mutz, Rüdiger & Hug, Sven E. & Daniel, Hans-Dieter, 2011. "A multilevel meta-analysis of studies reporting correlations between the h index and 37 different h index variants," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 346-359.
    17. Wiltrud Kuhlisch & Magnus Roos & Jörg Rothe & Joachim Rudolph & Björn Scheuermann & Dietrich Stoyan, 2016. "A statistical approach to calibrating the scores of biased reviewers of scientific papers," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 79(1), pages 37-57, January.
    18. Wen Luo & Oi-man Kwok, 2012. "The Consequences of Ignoring Individuals' Mobility in Multilevel Growth Models," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 37(1), pages 31-56, February.
    19. Patrícia Lopes Costa & Ana Margarida Graça & Pedro Marques-Quinteiro & Catarina Marques Santos & António Caetano & Ana Margarida Passos, 2013. "Multilevel Research in the Field of Organizational Behavior," SAGE Open, , vol. 3(3), pages 21582440134, August.
    20. Chong Wu & Fang Huang & Caihong Huang & Huiming Zhang, 2018. "Entry Mode, Market Selection, and Innovation Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-24, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:somere:v:39:y:2010:i:2:p:188-205. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.