MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Jackknife and Multilevel Modeling: A New Application of an Old Trick

2003· article· en· W33388808 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Richard G. Wolfe, Jennifer L. Dunn

Bibliographic record

VenueAlberta Journal of Educational Research · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicPsychometric Methodologies and Testing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJackknife resamplingMultilevel modelPsychologyStatisticsMathematics educationEconometricsMathematicsEstimator

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article the authors demonstrate two instances where the jackknife can be used to enhance hierarchical linear model (HLM) analyses. The jackknife was used to improve the HLM estimates of composite measures by jackknifing over items. The first study examined fixed-effects and variance component estimation. The jackknife appeared to reduce the bias in the estimates both of slopes and of variances by implicitly adjusting for item-by-person and item-by-group interactions. The second study examined the utility of the jackknife as a multilevel item analysis tool. The results suggest that pseudovalues offer a unique opportunity for isolating item variability in multilevel data. The jackknife seems to offer enhancements and insights to conventional HLM analyses.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.516
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.540
Threshold uncertainty score0.532

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.516
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.703
GPT teacher head0.594
Teacher spread0.109 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlberta Journal of Educational ResearchSame topicPsychometric Methodologies and TestingFrench-language works237,207