MCMC stopping rules in latent variable modelling

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Bayesian analysis relies heavily on the Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) algorithm to obtain random samples from posterior distributions. In this study, we compare the performance of MCMC stopping rules and provide a guideline for determining the termination point of the MCMC algorithm in latent variable models. In simulation studies, we examine the performance of four different MCMC stopping rules: potential scale reduction factor (PSRF), fixed-width stopping rule, Geweke's diagnostic, and effective sample size. Specifically, we evaluate these stopping rules in the context of the DINA model and the bifactor item response theory model, two commonly used latent variable models in educational and psychological measurement. Our simulation study findings suggest that single-chain approaches outperform multiple-chain approaches in terms of item parameter accuracy. However, when it comes to person parameter estimates, the effect of stopping rules diminishes. We caution against relying solely on the univariate PSRF, which is the most popular method, as it may terminate the algorithm prematurely and produce biased item parameter estimates if the cut-off value is not chosen carefully. Our research offers guidance to practitioners on choosing suitable stopping rules to improve the precision of the MCMC algorithm in models involving latent variables.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalBritish Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology
DOIs
StateE-pub ahead of print - Oct 10 2024

Keywords

  • bifactor IRT model
  • DINA model
  • effective sample size
  • Gelman–Rubin diagnostic
  • Geweke's diagnostic
  • MCMC algorithm
  • Monte Carlo standard error

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Statistics and Probability
  • Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)
  • General Psychology

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'MCMC stopping rules in latent variable modelling'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this