我需要帮助理解并跟踪使用glmer()从lme4获得的交互。
这些数据来自一个语言处理实验,该实验研究了三个范畴变量(控制/copula/性别)对二项式反应的影响(偏好或不喜欢)。每一个实验因素都有两个层次:控制(主客体)、性(ser/estar)、性别(男性/女性)。
我运行以下模型:
model1= glmer(preferences~control*copula*gender+(1|participant), family=binomial, data=data2)这些是我得到的结果:
Generalized linear mixed model fit by maximum likelihood (Laplace Approximation) ['glmerMod']
Family: binomial ( logit )
Formula: preferences_narrow ~ control * copula * gender + (1 | participant)
Data: data2
AIC BIC logLik deviance df.resid
1208.6 1261.1 -595.3 1190.6 2517
Scaled residuals:
Min 1Q Median 3Q Max
-8.6567 0.1970 0.2337 0.2883 0.5371
Random effects:
Groups Name Variance Std.Dev.
participant (Intercept) 0.254 0.504
Number of obs: 2526, groups: participant, 105
Fixed effects:
Estimate Std. Error z value Pr(>|z|)
(Intercept) 2.5034 0.2147 11.660 < 2e-16 ***
controlsubject 0.4882 0.3172 1.539 0.12380
copulaser 0.4001 0.3237 1.236 0.21646
gendermasc -0.4524 0.2659 -1.701 0.08888 .
controlsubject:copulaser -1.0355 0.4526 -2.288 0.02215 *
controlsubject:gendermasc 0.5790 0.4430 1.307 0.19121
copulaser:gendermasc 1.7343 0.5819 2.980 0.00288 **
controlsubject:copulaser:gendermasc -1.3121 0.7540 -1.740 0.08181 .
---
Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1
Correlation of Fixed Effects:
(Intr) cntrls coplsr gndrms cntrlsbjct:c cntrlsbjct:g cplsr:
contrlsbjct -0.602
copulaser -0.588 0.401
gendermasc -0.724 0.488 0.479
cntrlsbjct:c 0.415 -0.701 -0.716 -0.342
cntrlsbjct:g 0.432 -0.716 -0.287 -0.599 0.502
cplsr:gndrm 0.332 -0.223 -0.556 -0.457 0.397 0.274
cntrlsbjc:: -0.252 0.421 0.430 0.352 -0.600 -0.588 -0.772controlsubject:copulaser和copulaser:gendermasc有两种重要的交互作用。
在第一次互动之后,我使用电子邮件的方式进行了跟踪:
emmeans(model1, list(pairwise ~ control + copula), adjust = "tukey")结果似乎表明,多重对比推动了交互(当我对第二次交互做同样的事情时,也会发生类似的事情):
NOTE: Results may be misleading due to involvement in interactions
$`emmeans of control, copula`
control copula emmean SE df asymp.LCL asymp.UCL
object estar 2.277256 0.1497913 Inf 1.983670 2.570841
subject estar 3.054906 0.1912774 Inf 2.680009 3.429802
object ser 3.544448 0.2697754 Inf 3.015698 4.073198
subject ser 2.630568 0.1752365 Inf 2.287110 2.974025
Results are averaged over the levels of: gender
Results are given on the logit (not the response) scale.
Confidence level used: 0.95
$`pairwise differences of control, copula`
contrast estimate SE df z.ratio p.value
object,estar - subject,estar -0.7776499 0.2215235 Inf -3.510 0.0025
object,estar - object,ser -1.2671927 0.2910689 Inf -4.354 0.0001
object,estar - subject,ser -0.3533119 0.2088155 Inf -1.692 0.3279
subject,estar - object,ser -0.4895427 0.3138092 Inf -1.560 0.4017
subject,estar - subject,ser 0.4243380 0.2396903 Inf 1.770 0.2877
object,ser - subject,ser 0.9138807 0.3048589 Inf 2.998 0.0145
Results are averaged over the levels of: gender
Results are given on the log odds ratio (not the response) scale.
P value adjustment: tukey method for comparing a family of 4 estimates 然而,这张便条意味着什么呢?
NOTE: Results may be misleading due to involvement in interactions这是跟进这些互动的好程序吗?
谢谢!)
发布于 2019-03-25 20:53:10
如说明所示,所显示的估计数是对照、科普拉拉和性别组合的平均预测数,其平均值高于性别。同时,该模型包含了性别和其他两个因素之间的相互作用,这表明这些平均数可能没有意义。您可以通过构造一个3向预测的图来可视化这一点:
emmip(model1, gender ~ control * copula)如果预测在不同的情况下有很大的不同,那么它们的平均值将是无稽之谈。但是,如果他们的比较差不多,那就可以把他们平均了。这就是警告的意义所在。
我猜你是为了担心与性别的互动而见面的--在这种情况下,你应该分别做比较:
emmeans(model1, pairwise ~ control * copula | gender)https://stackoverflow.com/questions/55339938
复制相似问题