Given the nested nature of our data, we used
a multilevel modeling approach.
Data from 216 students, nested in 48 groups were analyzed using
a multilevel modeling approach.
The study uses
a multilevel modeling approach to test the effects of such variables as supervisor leadership style, emotional intelligence, empathy, implicit person theory, trust, and feedback environment on employees» perceptions of the coaching relationships they share with their supervisors.
Not exact matches
Individual growth curve
models were developed for
multilevel analysis and specifically designed for exploring longitudinal data on individual changes over time.23 Using this
approach, we applied the MIXED procedure in SAS (SAS Institute) to account for the random effects of repeated measurements.24 To specify the correct
model for our individual growth curves, we compared a series of MIXED
models by evaluating the difference in deviance between nested
models.23 Both fixed quadratic and cubic MIXED
models fit our data well, but we selected the fixed quadratic MIXED
model because the addition of a cubic time term was not statistically significant based on a log - likelihood ratio test.
Examples of his contributions include improved effect size estimates,
multilevel mediation
models, and Bayesian
approaches to mediation analysis.
Teacher - child relationships and academic achievement: a
multilevel propensity score
model approach.
Multilevel modeling (MLM) of complex survey data is an
approach increasingly being used in public health research.
We will use two - level
multilevel linear and logistic regression
models (mothers and babies nested within areas) to compare outcomes between individuals living in an AMIHS area compared with individuals who live in a propensity - matched comparison area, using an intention - to - treat
approach.
Bayesian estimation is used here because classical
approaches are problematic for the
multilevel TAR
model.
Van den Noortgate and Onghena (2003) compared
multilevel meta - analysis with traditional meta - analytic methods and concluded that maximum likelihood
multilevel approach is in general superior to the fixed - effects
approaches and that the results of the
multilevel approach are not substantially different from the results of the traditional random - effects
approaches for intercept only
models.
A
multilevel network
approach was used in which peer groups were identified via social network analysis, and peer group influence was evaluated with hierarchical linear
modeling (HLM).
This general
approach — to first quantify the intradyad relationships and then examine interdyad differences in the intradyad relationships — is the basis for most contemporary dyadic data analysis techniques, including sequential and state space grid analyses, coupled dynamic systems, and
multilevel modeling (Bakeman & Gottman, 1997; Bakeman & Quera, 2011; Boker & Laurenceau, 2007; Gonzalez & Griffin, 2012; Gottman, Murray, Swanson, Tyson, & Swanson, 2002; Hollenstein, 2013; Laurenceau & Bolger, 2005; Ram & Pedersen, 2008).