Search from over 60,000 research works

Advanced Search

Type-1 error inflation in the traditional by-participant analysis to metamemory accuracy: a generalized mixed-effects model perspective

[thumbnail of MurayamaSakakiYanSmith_JEPLMC_fin.pdf]
Preview
MurayamaSakakiYanSmith_JEPLMC_fin.pdf - Accepted Version (419kB) | Preview
Add to AnyAdd to TwitterAdd to FacebookAdd to LinkedinAdd to PinterestAdd to Email

Murayama, K., Sakaki, M. orcid id iconORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1993-5765, Yan, V. X. and Smith, G. (2014) Type-1 error inflation in the traditional by-participant analysis to metamemory accuracy: a generalized mixed-effects model perspective. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition, 40 (5). pp. 1287-1306. ISSN 0278-7393 doi: 10.1037/a0036914

Abstract/Summary

In order to examine metacognitive accuracy (i.e., the relationship between metacognitive judgment and memory performance), researchers often rely on by-participant analysis, where metacognitive accuracy (e.g., resolution, as measured by the gamma coefficient or signal detection measures) is computed for each participant and the computed values are entered into group-level statistical tests such as the t-test. In the current work, we argue that the by-participant analysis, regardless of the accuracy measurements used, would produce a substantial inflation of Type-1 error rates, when a random item effect is present. A mixed-effects model is proposed as a way to effectively address the issue, and our simulation studies examining Type-1 error rates indeed showed superior performance of mixed-effects model analysis as compared to the conventional by-participant analysis. We also present real data applications to illustrate further strengths of mixed-effects model analysis. Our findings imply that caution is needed when using the by-participant analysis, and recommend the mixed-effects model analysis.

Altmetric Badge

Item Type Article
URI https://reading-clone.eprints-hosting.org/id/eprint/36409
Item Type Article
Refereed Yes
Divisions Science
Life Sciences > School of Psychology and Clinical Language Sciences > Department of Psychology
Life Sciences > School of Psychology and Clinical Language Sciences > Language and Cognition
Publisher American Psychological Association.
Publisher Statement This article may not exactly replicate the final version published in the APA journal. It is not the copy of record
Download/View statistics View download statistics for this item

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

University Staff: Request a correction | Centaur Editors: Update this record

Search Google Scholar