<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Testing for a difference in variance in a variable when there is a random effect in Discussions</title>
    <link>https://community.jmp.com/t5/Discussions/Testing-for-a-difference-in-variance-in-a-variable-when-there-is/m-p/487460#M73123</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;I am not sure why you say Sample is a random variable. You assigned specific levels (classes) to each observation. The sample might be random, but the levels are not.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;You might use Fit Model to define the model, and change the fitting personality to &lt;STRONG&gt;Loglinear Variance&lt;/STRONG&gt;. Your data are not well-conditions for more than a simple main effects model. I assigned Sample as the location effect and Type as the spread effect. I could not include Type as a location effect because it is confounded with Sample. Including both variables as location effects.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="distribution.PNG" style="width: 751px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.jmp.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/42484i61702CBD2443CF80/image-size/large?v=v2&amp;amp;px=999" role="button" title="distribution.PNG" alt="distribution.PNG" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;But I can include Type as a spread effect to test your hypothesis.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="launch.PNG" style="width: 744px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.jmp.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/42482iFBE3FD08CDC1BF57/image-size/large?v=v2&amp;amp;px=999" role="button" title="launch.PNG" alt="launch.PNG" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;The estimated model from this specification exhibits no fundamental problems, but it might still be unsatisfactory.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="loglinear.PNG" style="width: 513px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.jmp.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/42483i4FFFD06CB44FC589/image-size/large?v=v2&amp;amp;px=999" role="button" title="loglinear.PNG" alt="loglinear.PNG" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;It appears that the variance is significantly different for the two levels of Type.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 May 2022 14:22:09 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Mark_Bailey</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2022-05-17T14:22:09Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Testing for a difference in variance in a variable when there is a random effect</title>
      <link>https://community.jmp.com/t5/Discussions/Testing-for-a-difference-in-variance-in-a-variable-when-there-is/m-p/487325#M73110</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Using "Fit Model"&amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;I'm predicting my dependent variable using a dichotomous nominal variable "Type" as well as a variable "Sample," which is a random effect (in JMP language that is; some would prefer to call "Sample" a random variable).&amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;This tests whether the two "Types" differ on my DV, again taking into account that "Sample" is a random effect.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Interestingly, the sample means for one "Type" are much more spread out compared with the sample means for the other "Type." I can conduct a significance test on the difference in variances using an F test, if I am willing just to use the sample means. But this isn't quite kosher, because the sample means are estimated with error, and ideally, this should be taken into account. I can't figure out how to do this though. Perhaps "Mixed Models" has this ability. (I do have JMP Pro 16.)&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;This is probably a bit "in the weeds" for this group, but if anyone has any ideas, I'd be grateful. I attach some data. DV=Paraphilia Vector 1, Type is the predictor of interest, and Sample is the random effect.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Jun 2023 00:49:32 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.jmp.com/t5/Discussions/Testing-for-a-difference-in-variance-in-a-variable-when-there-is/m-p/487325#M73110</guid>
      <dc:creator>profjmb</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-06-09T00:49:32Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Testing for a difference in variance in a variable when there is a random effect</title>
      <link>https://community.jmp.com/t5/Discussions/Testing-for-a-difference-in-variance-in-a-variable-when-there-is/m-p/487460#M73123</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I am not sure why you say Sample is a random variable. You assigned specific levels (classes) to each observation. The sample might be random, but the levels are not.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;You might use Fit Model to define the model, and change the fitting personality to &lt;STRONG&gt;Loglinear Variance&lt;/STRONG&gt;. Your data are not well-conditions for more than a simple main effects model. I assigned Sample as the location effect and Type as the spread effect. I could not include Type as a location effect because it is confounded with Sample. Including both variables as location effects.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="distribution.PNG" style="width: 751px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.jmp.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/42484i61702CBD2443CF80/image-size/large?v=v2&amp;amp;px=999" role="button" title="distribution.PNG" alt="distribution.PNG" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;But I can include Type as a spread effect to test your hypothesis.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="launch.PNG" style="width: 744px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.jmp.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/42482iFBE3FD08CDC1BF57/image-size/large?v=v2&amp;amp;px=999" role="button" title="launch.PNG" alt="launch.PNG" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;The estimated model from this specification exhibits no fundamental problems, but it might still be unsatisfactory.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="loglinear.PNG" style="width: 513px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.jmp.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/42483i4FFFD06CB44FC589/image-size/large?v=v2&amp;amp;px=999" role="button" title="loglinear.PNG" alt="loglinear.PNG" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;It appears that the variance is significantly different for the two levels of Type.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 May 2022 14:22:09 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.jmp.com/t5/Discussions/Testing-for-a-difference-in-variance-in-a-variable-when-there-is/m-p/487460#M73123</guid>
      <dc:creator>Mark_Bailey</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-05-17T14:22:09Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

