Notice: On March 31, it was **announced** that Statalist is moving from an email list to a **forum**. The old list will shut down on April 23, and its replacement, **statalist.org** is already up and running.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

From |
Cameron McIntosh <cnm100@hotmail.com> |

To |
STATA LIST <statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu> |

Subject |
RE: st: Cross-classification question |

Date |
Mon, 9 Jan 2012 23:10:20 -0500 |

Hi Sarah, You might get more feedback on this type of question on the Multilevel discussion list: http://www.bristol.ac.uk/cmm/learning/support/jisc.html ; It's true that the data you describe don't fit neatly into the usual cross-classified modeling scenarios. The closest example I have sometimes seen used is a study of intellectual growth where the students change classrooms over time... within your model the cross-classification by students and classrooms is contemporaneous but perhaps similar methods might be useful. I think you are generally on the right track w.r.t. the random effect modeling you suggest, but the following papers may give you some additional guidance: Luo, W., & Kwok, O.-M. (2011). The Consequences of Ignoring Individuals' Mobility in Multilevel Growth Models: A Monte Carlo Study. Journal of Educational and Behaviorial Statistics, Online First. http://jeb.sagepub.com/content/early/2011/07/30/1076998610394366.abstract Fielding, A., & Goldstein, H. (2006). Cross-classified and Multiple Membership Structures in Multilevel Models: An Introduction and Review. Research Report RR791. Birmingham, UK: Department for Education and Skills, University of Birmingham.http://www.socscistaff.bham.ac.uk/fielding/Cross_classified_review_RR791.pdf Goldstein, H., Burgess, S., & McConnell, B. (2007). Modelling the effect of pupil mobility on school differences in educational achievement. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A, 170, 941-954. Leckie, G. (2009). The complexity of school and neighbourhood effects and movements of pupils on school differences in models of educational achievement. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A, 172(3), 537-554. Chung, H. & Beretvas, S.N. (2011). The impact of ignoring multiple membership data structures in multilevel models. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, Early View.http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.2044-8317.2011.02023.x/abstract Hope this helps, Cam > Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2012 15:02:51 -0500 > Subject: st: Cross-classification question > From: sfp@brandeis.edu > To: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu > > Hello All, > > I am working on a project that I think requires a cross-classified approach. > > My data is from 1,000 students, surveyed in approximately 200 > classrooms in 1 school. Students took the survey in at least one and > often three different classrooms-- i.e. in Math, English, and Science. > The data set is organized such that each row is one students' survey > responses in one classroom. So, if a student took the survey three > times, their responses would be in three different rows. My dependent > variable is engagement, which is continuous and specific to whatever > classroom a student happened to to be in when they took the survey. > My independent variables include several student characteristics as > well as student perceptions of their teachers' classroom practices. > > I believe that my data is cross-classified but I am not sure. Most > students belong to more than one classroom in the entire data set, > which makes me think that it is cross-classified data. But within > each observation every student belongs to just one classroom and my > dependent variable is classroom-specific, which is contrary to every > example of cross-classification that I have found. Can any of you > shed some light on this dilemma for me? > > Also, if my data is indeed cross-classified, it seems like I can deal > with this issue by adding a random-effect for class subject to my > model, since each student is only in one classroom for Math, one for > English, etc. If so, is this the correct stata syntax for the null > model? > > xtmixed engagement || _all.R.subject || classid:, mle > > Or, is it: > > xtmixed engagement || _all.R.subject || _all.R.classid: , mle > > Thanks so much for your help! > > Best, > > Sarah > > * > * For searches and help try: > * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search > * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq > * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/ * * For searches and help try: * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/

**References**:**st: Cross-classification question***From:*Sarah Phillips <sfp@brandeis.edu>

- Prev by Date:
**st: Drawing from a standard Cauchy** - Next by Date:
**Re: st: Drawing from a standard Cauchy** - Previous by thread:
**st: Cross-classification question** - Next by thread:
**st: Where to place .mo files** - Index(es):