WEBVTT Kind: captions Language: en 00:00:00.669 --> 00:00:04.310 Maximum likelihood estimates of two different models that are nested 00:00:04.310 --> 00:00:07.790 can be compared using the likelihood ratio test. 00:00:07.790 --> 00:00:12.110 The idea is the same as in regression analysis and the F test. 00:00:12.110 --> 00:00:16.139 So in an F test, in regression analysis, we have two models. 00:00:16.139 --> 00:00:20.050 One is the constraint model and another one is the unconstrained model. 00:00:20.050 --> 00:00:24.090 Here, Model 2 is the more general, unconstraint model. 00:00:24.090 --> 00:00:27.250 And Model 1 is a special case of Model 2, 00:00:27.250 --> 00:00:30.859 because we get Model 1 from Model 2 by saying that 00:00:30.859 --> 00:00:34.690 these regression coefficients that are estimated here 00:00:34.690 --> 00:00:36.739 are actually zeros in Model 1, 00:00:36.739 --> 00:00:38.989 because we don't include these variables. 00:00:38.989 --> 00:00:40.670 Then we do some math, 00:00:40.670 --> 00:00:46.139 we calculate the sum of squares or R-squared of these models, 00:00:46.139 --> 00:00:48.109 we compare that to degrees of freedom, 00:00:48.109 --> 00:00:52.420 we get the statistic that follows the F distribution. 00:00:52.420 --> 00:00:55.499 In maximum likelihood estimates, 00:00:55.499 --> 00:00:58.989 we don't have the R-squared, we don't have the sum of squares, 00:00:58.989 --> 00:01:02.129 instead, we use the deviance statistic. 00:01:02.129 --> 00:01:06.729 So here in Kraimer's paper, we have two models. 00:01:06.729 --> 00:01:10.939 So Model 1 is the constraint model, 00:01:10.939 --> 00:01:13.979 Model 2 is the unconstrained model, 00:01:13.979 --> 00:01:17.220 because we have this coefficient here that's estimated, 00:01:17.220 --> 00:01:19.490 here it is constrained to be zero. 00:01:19.490 --> 00:01:23.590 So, we have one degree of freedom difference between these two models. 00:01:23.590 --> 00:01:28.270 Then we can calculate the likelihood ratio test of 00:01:28.270 --> 00:01:32.979 whether adding this one more parameter increases the model fit more 00:01:32.979 --> 00:01:36.159 than what can be expected by chance only, 00:01:36.159 --> 00:01:40.979 by comparing these deviances or -2 times log-likelihood. 00:01:40.979 --> 00:01:44.649 So, Model 2 is the unrestricted model, 00:01:44.649 --> 00:01:46.479 Model 1 is the restricted model. 00:01:46.479 --> 00:01:52.590 We calculate the difference between the deviances, 00:01:52.590 --> 00:01:55.549 which is 3.79. 00:01:55.549 --> 00:01:59.469 And that difference follows the chi-square distribution 00:01:59.469 --> 00:02:01.469 with one degree of freedom, 00:02:01.469 --> 00:02:04.700 because there is only one parameter difference here. 00:02:04.700 --> 00:02:09.750 And the p-value for that would be 0.05, 00:02:09.750 --> 00:02:15.450 which says that there is no statistically significant difference between the models 00:02:15.450 --> 00:02:18.790 that's on the border of 0.05 level. 00:02:18.790 --> 00:02:20.730 And it's also shown here 00:02:20.730 --> 00:02:23.620 that this is not very, very significant here. 00:02:23.620 --> 00:02:26.340 In contrast to the F test, 00:02:26.340 --> 00:02:28.040 which always, if you have one parameter, 00:02:28.040 --> 00:02:33.189 gives you the same exact p-value as t test, 00:02:33.189 --> 00:02:38.239 the significance test statistic here from z test, 00:02:38.239 --> 00:02:41.569 and the likelihood ratio, p-value, 00:02:41.569 --> 00:02:44.629 they don't necessarily have the exact same value, 00:02:44.629 --> 00:02:49.120 because these are based on large sample approximations 00:02:49.120 --> 00:02:53.739 that may not work as exactly as intended in a small samples. 00:02:53.739 --> 00:02:56.970 So there can be some scenarios like here, 00:02:56.970 --> 00:03:01.439 we have a significant coefficient, p is less than 0.05. 00:03:01.439 --> 00:03:05.379 But here we don't, we have p that is more than 0.05. 00:03:05.379 --> 00:03:06.840 But it's on the boundary. 00:03:06.840 --> 00:03:12.060 So we could just say that there is weak evidence for the existence of this relationship.