ArticlePsychometrika2022
A Systematic Study into the Factors that Affect the Predictive Accuracy of Multilevel VAR(1) Models.
Article in Psychometrika, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Modeling intraindividual variability in affect (MIVA): Formalized theoretical approach, computational model, and parameter recovery study.Behavior research methods · 2026Article
- An investigation into in-sample and out-of-sample model selection for nonstationary autoregressive models.The British journal of mathematical and statistical psychology · 2026Article
- Modeling qualitative between-person heterogeneity in time series using latent class vector autoregressive models.Behavior research methods · 2025Article
- Within- and Between-Individual Compliance in Mobile Health: Joint Modeling Approach to Nonrandom Missingness in an Intensive Longitudinal Observational Study.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2025Observational
- Cross-validation and predictive metrics in psychological research: Do not leave out the leave-one-out.Behavior research methods · 2025Article
- Temporal network of experience sampling methodology identifies sleep disturbance as a central symptom in generalized anxiety disorder.BMC psychiatry · 2024Article
- An experience sampling study on the links between daily teacher self-efficacy, need-supportive teaching and student intrinsic motivation.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Guest Editors' Introduction to the Special Issue on Forecasting with Intensive Longitudinal Data.Psychometrika · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The use of multilevel VAR(1) models to unravel within-individual process dynamics is gaining momentum in psychological research. These models accommodate the structure of intensive longitudinal datasets in which repeated measurements are nested within individuals. They estimate within-individual auto- and cross-regressive relationships while incorporating and using information about the distributions of these effects across individuals. An important quality feature of the obtained estimates pertains to how well they generalize to unseen data. Bulteel and colleagues (Psychol Methods 23(4):740-756, 2018a) showed that this feature can be assessed through a cross-validation approach, yielding a predictive accuracy measure. In this article, we follow up on their results, by performing three simulation studies that allow to systematically study five factors that likely affect the predictive accuracy of multilevel VAR(1) models: (i) the number of measurement occasions per person, (ii) the number of persons, (iii) the number of variables, (iv) the contemporaneous collinearity between the variables, and (v) the distributional shape of the individual differences in the VAR(1) parameters (i.e., normal versus multimodal distributions). Simulation results show that pooling information across individuals and using multilevel techniques prevent overfitting. Also, we show that when variables are expected to show strong contemporaneous correlations, performing multilevel VAR(1) in a reduced variable space can be useful. Furthermore, results reveal that multilevel VAR(1) models with random effects have a better predictive performance than person-specific VAR(1) models when the sample includes groups of individuals that share similar dynamics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34724142What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.