Hi Clyde,
Thank you so much for explaining Joseph's code for me. Now things make much more sense. I was able to apply the code to the original dataset I have. The inferences are similar (not identical) to those obtained by Joseph. I think that the reason for this is that the variable (X) is normally distributed.
Kindly, I have a few more questions please:
1) Can we use your bootstrapping approach(post #6) by these 4 time-group sub-samples (i.e. i.group##i.time)? That is, can the re-sampling take place in each of these 4 sub-samples separately?
2) Is the "mixed" model a generally accepted approach in this setting? I mean is there any credible reference which I can cite in my PhD thesis?
3) If I got you correctly, you meant that the _b[whatever]'s are the estimates stored in memory after running the -mixed- command and I do not necessarily need to understand the meaning of these _b[whatever]'s?
4) Do you agree on the following as a description for Joseph's approach:
We test the statistical difference between the variance ratios before and after the treatment by fitting a mixed linear model to the final data sample. Specifically, the mixed linear regression runs a random effects regression of the dependent variable on the time dummy, the group dummy and the interaction term. In this way, the mixed linear model clusters the sample into 4 sub-samples: (group=0 & time=0), (group=1 & time=0), (group=0 & time=1) and (group=1 & time=1). Then, the mixed linear model estimates the variance of the dependent variable in each sub-sample and calculates the standard deviation for each variance. Next, we calculate the variance ratios (pre- and post-treatment) through utilising a non-linear combination of estimators that uses the delta method. Finally, we test the difference between both ratios using the Chi-squared statistic.
Thank you for your time and effort, Clyde. I truly appreciate it.
Mostafa
Thank you so much for explaining Joseph's code for me. Now things make much more sense. I was able to apply the code to the original dataset I have. The inferences are similar (not identical) to those obtained by Joseph. I think that the reason for this is that the variable (X) is normally distributed.
Kindly, I have a few more questions please:
1) Can we use your bootstrapping approach(post #6) by these 4 time-group sub-samples (i.e. i.group##i.time)? That is, can the re-sampling take place in each of these 4 sub-samples separately?
2) Is the "mixed" model a generally accepted approach in this setting? I mean is there any credible reference which I can cite in my PhD thesis?
3) If I got you correctly, you meant that the _b[whatever]'s are the estimates stored in memory after running the -mixed- command and I do not necessarily need to understand the meaning of these _b[whatever]'s?
4) Do you agree on the following as a description for Joseph's approach:
We test the statistical difference between the variance ratios before and after the treatment by fitting a mixed linear model to the final data sample. Specifically, the mixed linear regression runs a random effects regression of the dependent variable on the time dummy, the group dummy and the interaction term. In this way, the mixed linear model clusters the sample into 4 sub-samples: (group=0 & time=0), (group=1 & time=0), (group=0 & time=1) and (group=1 & time=1). Then, the mixed linear model estimates the variance of the dependent variable in each sub-sample and calculates the standard deviation for each variance. Next, we calculate the variance ratios (pre- and post-treatment) through utilising a non-linear combination of estimators that uses the delta method. Finally, we test the difference between both ratios using the Chi-squared statistic.
Thank you for your time and effort, Clyde. I truly appreciate it.
Mostafa
Comment