I wasn't sure whether this was more appropriate to ask here or CrossValidated as I'm specifically asking about using R / lavaan...
I'm not sure if I've completely misunderstood how violations of assumptions are checked. I understand that we can obtain diagnostic plots for linear models with:
model <- lm(data$outcome ~ data$predictor)
plot(model, which = c(1:6))
But I'm having trouble figuring out how I should do this for a mediation model fitted like so:
model <- 'outcome ~ c*predictor + b*mediator
mediator ~ a*predictor
indirect_effect := a*b
total_effect := c + (a*b)
'
model.fit <- lavaan::sem(
model = model,
data = data,
missing = "FIML",
estimator = "ML")
Then if I try obtaining plots in the same way (plot(model.fit, which = c(1:6))), I get Error in as.double(y) : cannot coerce type 'S4' to vector of type 'double'.
Also, to check for violations of assumptions for Pearson's correlation, would we do so by looking at the structure of each variable individually, or by making a linear model (lm(data$outcome ~ data$predictor)), or using the correlation itself (cor.test(data$var1, data$var2)) in some way?
Try:
lavaanPlot::lavaanPlot(model = model.fit, coefs=T)
Related
I am running a linear mixed effects models using the "nlme" package looking at stress and lifestyle as predictors of change in cognition over 4 years in a longitudinal dataset. All variables in the model are continuous variables.
I am able to create the model and get the summary statistics using this code:
mod1 <- lme(MS ~ age + sex + edu + GDST1*Time + HLI*Time + GDST1*HLI*Time, random= ~ 1|ID, data=NuAge_long, na.action=na.omit)
summary(mod1)
I am trying to use the "interactions" package to probe the 3-way interaction:
sim_slopes(model = mod1, pred = Time, modx = GDST1, mod2 = HLI, data = NuAge_long)
but am receiving this error:
Error in if (tcol == "df") tcol <- "t val." : argument is of length zero
I am also trying to plot the interaction using the same "interactions" package:
interact_plot(model = mod1, pred = Time, modx = GDST1, mod2 = HLI, data = NuAge_long)
and am receiving this error:
Error in UseMethod("family") : no applicable method for 'family' applied to an object of class "lme"
I can't seem to find what these errors mean and why I'm getting them. Any help would be appreciated!
From ?interactions::sim_slopes:
The function is tested with ‘lm’, ‘glm’,
‘svyglm’, ‘merMod’, ‘rq’, ‘brmsfit’, ‘stanreg’ models. Models
from other classes may work as well but are not officially
supported. The model should include the interaction of
interest.
Note this does not include lme models. On the other hand, merMod models are those generated by lme4::[g]lmer(), and as far as I can tell you should be able to fit this model equally well with lmer():
library(lme4)
mod1 <- lmer(MS ~ age + sex + edu + GDST1*Time + HLI*Time + GDST1*HLI*Time
+ (1|ID), data=NuAge_long)
(things will get harder if you want to specify correlation structures, e.g. correlation = corAR1(), which works for lme() but not lmer() ...)
I am running a regression model that looks like this:
wwMLR <- lm(contAOMIdiff ~ PHQ9 + KVIQtot, data = wwMeanWide4)
Having used check_heteroscedasticity(wwMLR) from the Performance package I can see that the regression model violates the assumption of homoscedasticity. Due to this I have built a model with robust standard errors shown below:
library(estimatr)
wwMLR_hc3 <- lm_robust(formula = contAOMIdiff ~ PHQ9 + KVIQtot, data = wwMeanWide4,
se_type = "HC3", alpha = 0.0482)
What I would like to do now is compare this regression model to a null using Wald's Test. The null model looks like the below:
wwnull_hc3 <- lm_robust(formula = contAOMIdiff ~ 1, data = wwMeanWide4,
se_type = "HC3", alpha = 0.0482)
When I try to compare these using a Wald's Test:
library(lmtest)
waldtest(wwMLR_hc3, wwnull_hc3, vcov = vcovHC)
I get an error:
Error in eval(predvars, data, env) : object 'contAOMIdiff' not found
contAOMIdiff is my response variable in the regression. I am not sure why it can't be found but I am assuming this may be a compatibility issue between the lm_robust model type and the waldtest() function.
If anyone has any ideas on how I can get this to work, or an alternate way to run a Wald's Test on these two models I would be very grateful.
I have found a similar question here, which has not been answered: R Wald test for cluster robust se's
Does anyone know how to get stargazer to display clustered SEs for lm models? (And the corresponding F-test?) If possible, I'd like to follow an approach similar to computing heteroskedasticity-robust SEs with sandwich and popping them into stargazer as in http://jakeruss.com/cheatsheets/stargazer.html#robust-standard-errors-replicating-statas-robust-option.
I'm using lm to get my regression models, and I'm clustering by firm (a factor variable that I'm not including in the regression models). I also have a bunch of NA values, which makes me think multiwayvcov is going to be the best package (see the bottom of landroni's answer here - Double clustered standard errors for panel data - and also https://sites.google.com/site/npgraham1/research/code)? Note that I do not want to use plm.
Edit: I think I found a solution using the multiwayvcov package...
library(lmtest) # load packages
library(multiwayvcov)
data(petersen) # load data
petersen$z <- petersen$y + 0.35 # create new variable
ols1 <- lm(y ~ x, data = petersen) # create models
ols2 <- lm(y ~ x + z, data = petersen)
cl.cov1 <- cluster.vcov(ols1, data$firmid) # cluster-robust SEs for ols1
cl.robust.se.1 <- sqrt(diag(cl.cov1))
cl.wald1 <- waldtest(ols1, vcov = cl.cov1)
cl.cov2 <- cluster.vcov(ols2, data$ticker) # cluster-robust SEs for ols2
cl.robust.se.2 <- sqrt(diag(cl.cov2))
cl.wald2 <- waldtest(ols2, vcov = cl.cov2)
stargazer(ols1, ols2, se=list(cl.robust.se.1, cl.robust.se.2), type = "text") # create table in stargazer
Only downside of this approach is you have to manually re-enter the F-stats from the waldtest() output for each model.
Using the packages lmtest and multiwayvcov causes a lot of unnecessary overhead. The easiest way to compute clustered standard errors in R is the modified summary() function. This function allows you to add an additional parameter, called cluster, to the conventional summary() function. The following post describes how to use this function to compute clustered standard errors in R:
https://economictheoryblog.com/2016/12/13/clustered-standard-errors-in-r/
You can easily the summary function to obtain clustered standard errors and add them to the stargazer output. Based on your example you could simply use the following code:
# estimate models
ols1 <- lm(y ~ x)
# summary with cluster-robust SEs
summary(ols1, cluster="cluster_id")
# create table in stargazer
stargazer(ols1, se=list(coef(summary(ols1,cluster = c("cluster_id")))[, 2]), type = "text")
I would recommend lfe package, which is much more powerful package than lm package. You can easily specify the cluster in the regression model:
ols1 <- felm(y ~ x + z|0|0|firmid, data = petersen)
summary(ols1)
stargazer(OLS1, type="html")
The clustered standard errors will be automatically produced. And stargazer will report the clustered-standard error accordingly.
By the way (allow me to do more marketing), for micro-econometric analysis, felm is highly recommended. You can specify fixed effects and IV easily using felm. The grammar is like:
ols1 <- felm(y ~ x + z|FixedEffect1 + FixedEffect2 | IV | Cluster, data = Data)
I found that the predict function is currently not implemented in cumulative link mixed models fitted using the clmm function in ordinal R package. While predict is implemented for clmm2 in the same package, I chose to apply clmm instead because the later allows for more than one random effects. Further, I also fitted several clmm models and performed model averaging using model.avg function in MuMIn package. Ideally, I want to predict probabilities using the average model. However, while MuMIn supports clmm models, predict will also not work with the average model.
Is there a way to hack the predict function so that the function not only could predict probabilities from a clmm model, but also predict using model averaged coefficients from clmm (i.e. object of class "averaging")? For example:
require(ordinal)
require(MuMIn)
mm1 <- clmm(SURENESS ~ PROD + (1|RESP) + (1|RESP:PROD), data = soup,
link = "probit", threshold = "equidistant")
## test random effect:
mm2 <- clmm(SURENESS ~ PROD + (1|RESP) + (1|RESP:PROD), data = soup,
link = "logistic", threshold = "equidistant")
#create a model selection object
mm.sel<-model.sel(mm1,mm2)
##perform a model average
mm.avg<-model.avg(mm.sel)
#create new data and predict
new.data<-soup
##predict with indivindual model
predict(mm1, new.data)
I got the following error message:
In UseMethod("predict") :
no applicable method for predict applied to an object of class "clmm"
##predict with model average
predict(mm.avg, new.data)
Another error is returned:
Error in predict.averaging(mm.avg, new.data) :
predict for models 'mm1' and 'mm2' caused errors
I've been using clmm as well and yes I confirm predict.clmm is NOT (yet?) implemented. I didn't yet check the source code for fake.predict.clmm. It might work. If it doesn't, you're stuck with doing stuff by hand or using predict.clmm2.
I found a potential solution (pasted below) but have not been able to make work for my data.
Solution here: https://gist.github.com/mainambui/c803aaf857e54a5c9089ea05f91473bc
I think the problem is the number of coefficients I am using but am not experienced enough to figure it out. Hopefully this helps someone out though.
This is the model and newdata that I am using, though it is actually a model averaged version. Same predictors though.
ma10 <- clmm(Location3 ~ Sex * Grass3 + Sex * Forb3 + (1|Tag_ID), data =
IP_all_dunes)
ma_1 <- model.avg(ma10, ma8, ma5)##top 3 models
new_ma<- data.frame(Sex = c("m","f","m","f","m","f","m","f"),
Grass3 = c("1","1","1","1","0","0","0","0"),
Forb3 = c("0","0","1","1","0","0","1","1"))
# Arguments:
# - model = a clmm model
# - modelAvg = a clmm model average (object of class averaging)
# - newdata = a dataframe of new data to apply the model to
# Returns a dataframe of predicted probabilities for each row and response level
fake.predict.clmm <- function(modelAvg, newdata) {
# Actual prediction function
pred <- function(eta, theta, cat = 1:(length(theta) + 1), inv.link = plogis) {
Theta <- c(-1000, theta, 1000)
sapply(cat, function(j) inv.link(Theta[j + 1] - eta) - inv.link(Theta[j] -
eta))
}
# Multiply each row by the coefficients
#coefs <- c(model$beta, unlist(model$ST))##turn off if a model average is used
beta <- modelAvg$coefficients[2,3:12]
coefs <- c(beta, unlist(modelAvg$ST))
xbetas <- sweep(newdata, MARGIN=2, coefs, `*`)
# Make predictions
Theta<-modelAvg$coefficients[2,1:2]
#pred.mat <- data.frame(pred(eta=rowSums(xbetas), theta=model$Theta))
pred.mat <- data.frame(pred(eta=rowSums(xbetas), theta=Theta))
#colnames(pred.mat) <- levels(model$model[,1])
a<-attr(modelAvg, "modelList")
colnames(pred.mat) <- levels(a[[1]]$model[,1])
pred.mat
}
I'm using the MuMln package in R to get an averaged model (http://www.inside-r.org/packages/cran/MuMIn/docs/model.avg), and predict from that. The package also includes a predict function specifically for an object returned by model.avg (http://www.inside-r.org/node/123636). I've tried using the examples listed, code as follows:
# Example from Burnham and Anderson (2002), page 100:
fm1 <- lm(y ~ X1 + X2 + X3 + X4, data = Cement)
ms1 <- dredge(fm1)
# obtain model average for AIC delta <2
avgm <- model.avg(ms1, subset=delta<2)
# predict from the averaged model
averaged.full <- predict(avgm, full = TRUE)
But I keep getting
Error in predict.averaging(avgm, full = TRUE): can predict only from 'averaging' object containing model list
which I don't understand, because I did follow the examples and used an object returned by model.avg. Am I missing something?
When you create an "averaging" object directly from "model.selection" object, it does not contain the component models, which are required for predict to work. You can use model.avg(..., fit = TRUE) which will fit the models again.
To avoid fitting the models twice, you can first create a list of all models with
lapply(dredge(..., evaluate = FALSE), eval) and afterwards
use model.avg(..., subset = ...) on it.