Abstract
In their comments on the authors' article (M. Siemer & J. Joormann, 2003), R. C. Serlin, B. E. Wampold, and J. R. Levin (2003) and P. Crits-Christoph, X. Tu, and R. Gallop (2003) took issue with the authors' suggestion to evaluate therapy studies with nested providers with a fixed model approach. In this reply, the authors comment on Serlin et al.'s critique by showing that their arguments do not apply, are based on misconceptions about the purpose and nature of statistical inference, or are based on flawed reasoning. The authors also comment on Crits-Christoph et al.'s critique by showing that the proposed approach is very similar to, but less inclusive than, their own suggestion.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 535-544 |
| Number of pages | 10 |
| Journal | Psychological Methods |
| Volume | 8 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Dec 1 2003 |
Fingerprint
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Psychology(all)
Cite this
Assumptions and Consequences of Treating Providers in Therapy Studies as Fixed Versus Random Effects : Reply to Crits-Christoph, Tu, and Gallop (2003) and Serlin, Wampold, and Levin (2003). / Siemer, Matthias; Joormann, Jutta.
In: Psychological Methods, Vol. 8, No. 4, 01.12.2003, p. 535-544.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Assumptions and Consequences of Treating Providers in Therapy Studies as Fixed Versus Random Effects
T2 - Reply to Crits-Christoph, Tu, and Gallop (2003) and Serlin, Wampold, and Levin (2003)
AU - Siemer, Matthias
AU - Joormann, Jutta
PY - 2003/12/1
Y1 - 2003/12/1
N2 - In their comments on the authors' article (M. Siemer & J. Joormann, 2003), R. C. Serlin, B. E. Wampold, and J. R. Levin (2003) and P. Crits-Christoph, X. Tu, and R. Gallop (2003) took issue with the authors' suggestion to evaluate therapy studies with nested providers with a fixed model approach. In this reply, the authors comment on Serlin et al.'s critique by showing that their arguments do not apply, are based on misconceptions about the purpose and nature of statistical inference, or are based on flawed reasoning. The authors also comment on Crits-Christoph et al.'s critique by showing that the proposed approach is very similar to, but less inclusive than, their own suggestion.
AB - In their comments on the authors' article (M. Siemer & J. Joormann, 2003), R. C. Serlin, B. E. Wampold, and J. R. Levin (2003) and P. Crits-Christoph, X. Tu, and R. Gallop (2003) took issue with the authors' suggestion to evaluate therapy studies with nested providers with a fixed model approach. In this reply, the authors comment on Serlin et al.'s critique by showing that their arguments do not apply, are based on misconceptions about the purpose and nature of statistical inference, or are based on flawed reasoning. The authors also comment on Crits-Christoph et al.'s critique by showing that the proposed approach is very similar to, but less inclusive than, their own suggestion.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0347062733&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0347062733&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1037/1082-989X.8.4.535
DO - 10.1037/1082-989X.8.4.535
M3 - Article
VL - 8
SP - 535
EP - 544
JO - Psychological Methods
JF - Psychological Methods
SN - 1082-989X
IS - 4
ER -