Multilevel analysis quantifies variation in the experimental effect while optimizing power and preventing false positives

BackgroundIn neuroscience, experimental designs in which multiple measurements are collected in the same research object or treatment facility are common. Such designs result in clustered or nested data. When clusters include measurements from different experimental conditions, both the mean of the dependent variable and the effect of the experimental manipulation may vary over clusters. In practice, this type of cluster-related variation is often overlooked. Not accommodating cluster-related variation can result in inferential errors concerning the overall experimental effect.ResultsThe exact effect of ignoring the clustered nature of the data depends on the effect of clustering. Using simulation studies we show that cluster-related variation in the experimental effect, if ignored, results in a false positive rate (i.e., Type I error rate) that is appreciably higher (up to ~20–~50 %) than the chosen $$\alpha$$α-level (e.g., $$\alpha$$α = 0.05). If the effect of clustering is limited to the intercept, the failure to accommodate clustering can result in a loss of statistical power to detect the overall experimental effect. This effect is most pronounced when both the magnitude of the experimental effect and the sample size are small (e.g., ~25 % less power given an experimental effect with effect size d of 0.20, and a sample size of 10 clusters and 5 observations per experimental condition per cluster).ConclusionsWhen data is collected from a research design in which observations from the same cluster are obtained in different experimental conditions, multilevel analysis should be used to analyze the data. The use of multilevel analysis not only ensures correct statistical interpretation of the overall experimental effect, but also provides a valuable test of the generalizability of the experimental effect over (intrinsically) varying settings, and a means to reveal the cause of cluster-related variation in experimental effect.

[1]  J. Hox Multilevel analysis: Techniques and applications, 2nd ed. , 2010 .

[2]  L. Hedges Effect Sizes in Cluster-Randomized Designs , 2007 .

[3]  T. Williamson,et al.  Choice of analytic approach for eye-specific outcomes: one eye or two? , 2012, American journal of ophthalmology.

[4]  B. Tabachnick,et al.  Using Multivariate Statistics , 1983 .

[5]  Roel Bosker,et al.  Standard Errors and Sample Sizes for Two-Level Research , 1993 .

[6]  J. Hox,et al.  Sufficient Sample Sizes for Multilevel Modeling , 2005 .

[7]  Sally Galbraith,et al.  A Study of Clustered Data and Approaches to Its Analysis , 2010, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[8]  P. Lachenbruch Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.) , 1989 .

[9]  Timothy J. Robinson,et al.  Multilevel Analysis: Techniques and Applications , 2002 .

[10]  Daniel Stegmueller,et al.  How Many Countries for Multilevel Modeling? A Comparison of Frequentist and Bayesian Approaches , 2013 .

[11]  Mirjam Moerbeek,et al.  A comparison between traditional methods and multilevel regression for the analysis of multicenter intervention studies. , 2003, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[12]  G. A. Marcoulides Multilevel Analysis Techniques and Applications , 2002 .

[13]  Stanley E Lazic,et al.  The problem of pseudoreplication in neuroscientific studies: is it affecting your analysis? , 2010, BMC Neuroscience.

[14]  Sachin Sapatnekar,et al.  What is statistical design? , 2005, SIGD.

[15]  S. Raudenbush,et al.  Statistical power and optimal design for multisite randomized trials. , 2000, Psychological methods.

[16]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[17]  Anthony S. Bryk,et al.  Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods , 1992 .

[18]  Brian A. Nosek,et al.  Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience , 2013, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[19]  Cora J. M. Maas,et al.  Robustness issues in multilevel regression analysis , 2004 .

[20]  Tom A. B. Snijders,et al.  Variance Component Testing in Multilevel Models , 2001 .

[21]  Matthijs Verhage,et al.  A solution to dependency: using multilevel analysis to accommodate nested data , 2014, Nature Neuroscience.

[22]  Roel Bosker,et al.  Multilevel analysis : an introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling , 1999 .

[23]  E. Zorrilla,et al.  Multiparous species present problems (and possibilities) to developmentalists. , 1997, Developmental psychobiology.

[24]  Stanley E Lazic,et al.  Improving basic and translational science by accounting for litter-to-litter variation in animal models , 2013, BMC Neuroscience.

[25]  S Senn,et al.  Some controversies in planning and analysing multi-centre trials. , 1998, Statistics in medicine.

[26]  Jacob Cohen Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences , 1969, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[27]  D. Bates,et al.  Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4 , 2014, 1406.5823.

[28]  Risto Lehtonen,et al.  Multilevel Statistical Models , 2005 .