Multilevel analysis of matching behavior: A comparison of maximum likelihood and Bayesian estimation

Abstract

AbstractWhile trying to infer laws of behavior, accounting for both within‐subjects and between‐subjects variance is often overlooked. It has been advocated recently to use multilevel modeling to analyze matching behavior. Using multilevel modeling within behavior analysis has its own challenges though. Adequate sample sizes are required (at both levels) for unbiased parameter estimates. The purpose of the current study is to compare parameter recovery and hypothesis rejection rates of maximum likelihood (ML) estimation and Bayesian estimation (BE) of multilevel models for matching behavior studies. Four factors were investigated through simulations: number of subjects, number of measurements by subject, sensitivity (slope), and variance of the random effect. Results showed that both ML estimation and BE with flat priors yielded acceptable statistical properties for intercept and slope fixed effects. The ML estimation procedure generally had less bias, lower RMSE, more power, and false‐positive rates closer to the nominal rate. Thus, we recommend ML estimation over BE with uninformative priors, considering our results. The BE procedure requires more informative priors to be used in multilevel modeling of matching behavior, which will require further studies.