Ordinal state‐trait regression for intensive longitudinal data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In many psychological studies, in particular those conducted by experience sampling, mental states are measured repeatedly for each participant. Such a design allows for regression models that separate between- from within-person, or trait-like from state-like, components of association between two variables. But these models are typically designed for continuous variables, whereas mental state variables are most often measured on an ordinal scale. In this paper we develop a model for disaggregating between- from within-person effects of one ordinal variable on another. As in standard ordinal regression, our model posits a continuous latent response whose value determines the observed response. We allow the latent response to depend nonlinearly on the trait and state variables, but impose a novel penalty that shrinks the fit towards a linear model on the latent scale. A simulation study shows that this penalization approach is effective at finding a middle ground between an overly restrictive linear model and an overfitted nonlinear model. The proposed method is illustrated with an application to data from the experience sampling study of Baumeister et al. (2020, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 46, 1631).
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.047 | 0.134 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".