Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by de Leeuw, J.
Right arrow Articles by Kreft, I. G. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Articles

Questioning Multilevel Models

Jan de Leeuw

University of California, Los Angeles

Ita G. G. Kreft

California State University, Los Angeles

In this article, practical problems with multilevel techniques are discussed. These problems, brought to our attention by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), have to do with terminology, computer programs employing different algorithms, and interpretations of the coefficients in one or two steps. We discuss the usefulness of the hierarchical linear model (HM) in the most common situation in education—that of a large number of relatively small groups. We also point to situations where the more complicated HMs can be replaced with simpler models, with statistical properties that are easier to study. We conclude that more studies need to be done to establish the claimed superiority of restricted versus unrestricted maximum likelihood, to study the effects of shrinkage on the estimators, and to explore the merits of simpler methods such as weighted least squares. Finally, distinctions must be made between choice of model, choice of technique, choice of algorithm, and choice of computer program. While HMs are an elegant conceptualization, they are not always necessary. Traditional techniques perform as well, or better, if there are large groups and small intraclass correlations, and if the researcher is interested only in the fixed-level regression coefficients.

Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, Vol. 20, No. 2, 171-189 (1995)
DOI: 10.3102/10769986020002171


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Research on AgingHome page
H. B. Degenholtz, R. A. Kane, R. L. Kane, and M. D. Finch
Long-Term Care Case Managers' Out-of-Home Placement Decisions: An Application of Hierarchical Logistic Regression
Research on Aging, March 1, 1999; 21(2): 240 - 274.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
EDUCATIONAL EVALUATION AND POLICY ANALYSISHome page
G. G. Huang, S. Weng, F. Zhang, and M. P. Cohen
Outmigration Among Rural High School Graduates: The Effect of Academic and Vocational Programs
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, January 1, 1997; 19(4): 360 - 372.
[Abstract] [PDF]



AER home page RER home page JEB home page EPA home page RRE home page