mxSE standard errors for nested models (AE, etc.).
Posted on
mirusem
Joined: 11/19/2018
Forums
I noticed that the standard errors that can be computed for say, the AE model, return the same standard errors for the A and the E estimate. Is this expected? Just want to be sure. I know SEs in general aren't recommended for CIs, but I am doing this for the sake of a different analysis so just want to be sure that this is what would be expected. I noticed this isn't the case when it's a full model (ACE, etc.).
Also, would it be fair to say, the SEs of given constrained parameters (that are constrained to 0) are 0 themselves? That's what it looks like for the cases in which you calculate the SE of C for the AE model, for example; but as an alternative example (as this isn't technically fully modelled), for example, if the ACE model C parameter is positive (in the direct variance approach), is it appropriate to say the D estimate is 0 (logically, albeit, D = -C in another line of thought), and the D SE is 0?
Thanks as always!
SE is 0
Log in or register to post comments
In reply to SE is 0 by AdminRobK
Got it
Log in or register to post comments
Not expected equality
Log in or register to post comments
In reply to Not expected equality by AdminNeale
General
Sorry for the delay, just saw this (and the other posts, really appreciate everyone's responses, etc.). Is this the case for subnested models (for example) such as AE? For example, when I run it specifically for ACE, the E SEs seem to usually be lower than A as you describe.
But for AE, the SEs seem to be the same when computing them (for both A and E, with C as it is fixed having a 0 SE). This is specifically when running mxSE(top.A_std,AE,run=TRUE) (where, in this instance, AE is my model, and top.A/top.C/top.E are all looked at in the same way).
Log in or register to post comments
In reply to General by mirusem
Checked with genetics workshop example
So that would just be that example, followed by:
SE_A = c(mxSE(top.A_std,AEmodel_1,run=TRUE)
SE_E = c(mxSE(top.E_std,AEmodel_1,run=TRUE), etc.
And in doing that, I get the same pattern (A and E SEs are the same).
Log in or register to post comments
In reply to Checked with genetics workshop example by mirusem
A=1-E
Log in or register to post comments
In reply to Checked with genetics workshop example by mirusem
A=1-E
Log in or register to post comments