39 views

Skip to first unread message

Oct 4, 2019, 5:18:08 AM10/4/19

to lavaan

Hi everyone,

I am running a regression based on covariances matrix with two predictors, PS and PC (script to follow).

All is working as intended but I get slightly different p-values for PS (p = .082) and PC (p = .013) than the SPSS values.

Any ideas on why this happens?

Many thanks in advance.

script:

# Y : Dv

# PS, PC predictors (k:2 predictors, plus 1 intercept)

# N contains 100 onservations

N <- 100

k <-2

#define correlation matrix

cor_matrix =

matrix(

c(

1, 0.1, -0.2,

0.1, 1, 0.3,

-0.2, 0.3, 1

), nrow = 3, ncol = 3,

dimnames = list(

c("Y", "PS", "PC"),

c("Y", "PS", "PC")

))

# convert correlation matrix to covvariance matrix for lavaan

library(lavaan)

sd_vector = c(1,1,1)

mean_vector = c(0,0,0)

cov_matrix = lavaan::cor2cov(cor_matrix, sd_vector)

# fit the model

fit <- sem( "Y ~ PS + PC",

sample.cov = cov_matrix,

sample.nobs = N,

meanstructure = TRUE,

sample.mean = mean_vector)

# get Rsquare

inspect(fit, "r2")

R2 <-inspect(fit, "r2")

# get F-statistic and p-value

fvalue <-((R2)*(N-k-1))/((1-R2)*(k))

cat("F = ", fvalue)

pvalue <- pf(fvalue, k, N-k-1, lower.tail = FALSE)

cat("p = ", pvalue)

# look at the regression

summary(fit, standardize=TRUE, rsquare = TRUE)

Oct 4, 2019, 6:19:07 AM10/4/19

to lavaan

I get slightly different p-values for PS (p = .082) and PC (p = .013) than the SPSS values.Any ideas on why this happens?

The point estimates are the same because OLS estimates are ML estimates when OLS assumptions are met. But MLE is more efficient, so its *SE*s are smaller, affecting the *t* or Wald *z* ratio and *p* values. Also, even if the *SE*s were identical, the *p* value would differ because MLE is asymptotic, whereas OLS is not; in the latter, the *df* parameter for an approximately normal *t* distribution can be derived, instead of relying on an asymptotic Wald *z* statistic being perfectly normal even in finite samples.

FYI, you can simulate data that conform perfectly to your summary stats if you just want to use lm()

`simData <- MASS::mvrnorm(N, mu = mean_vector, Sigma = cov_matrix,`

empirical = TRUE)

summary(lm(Y ~ PS + PC, data = data.frame(simData))) # same slopes and R^2

Terrence D. Jorgensen

Assistant Professor, Methods and Statistics

Research Institute for Child Development and Education, the University of Amsterdam

http://www.uva.nl/profile/t.d.jorgensen

Assistant Professor, Methods and Statistics

Research Institute for Child Development and Education, the University of Amsterdam

http://www.uva.nl/profile/t.d.jorgensen

Oct 4, 2019, 7:08:01 AM10/4/19

to lavaan

Many thanks Terrence,

especially for the simulating data part. I will look into that straight away.

All the best,

Lazaros

Reply all

Reply to author

Forward

0 new messages

Search

Clear search

Close search

Google apps

Main menu