To vary or not to vary: A flexible empirical Bayes factor for testing variance components

Random effects are the gold standard for capturing structural heterogeneity, such as individual differences or temporal dependence. Yet testing their presence is difficult because variance components are constrained to be non-negative, creating a boundary problem. This paper introduces a flexible empirical Bayes factor (EBF) for testing random effects. Instead of testing whether a variance component equals zero, the EBF evaluates the equivalent hypothesis that all random effects are zero. The approach avoids manual prior specification: the distribution of the random effects is modeled at the lower level and estimated directly from the data, yielding an "empirical" Bayes factor. Using a Savage-Dickey density ratio, the EBF requires only the full model fit, eliminating the need to estimate multiple models with alternative random-effects structures. The method enables testing a single random effect as well as multiple, potentially correlated, random effects simultaneously. Simulation studies examine the operating characteristics of the criterion. To illustrate its breadth, the EBF is applied to several widely used models in psychological research and related fields, including generalized linear crossed mixed-effects models, spatial random-effects models, dynamic structural equation models, random-intercept cross-lagged panel models, and nonlinear mixed-effects models.

Publication Details

Journal
British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology
Published
2026-03-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/bmsp.70048
Primary Topic
Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

To vary or not to vary: A flexible empirical Bayes factor for testing variance components

British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology
Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
article

To vary or not to vary: A flexible empirical Bayes factor for testing variance components

article en

Abstract

Random effects are the gold standard for capturing structural heterogeneity, such as individual differences or temporal dependence. Yet testing their presence is difficult because variance components are constrained to be non-negative, creating a boundary problem. This paper introduces a flexible empirical Bayes factor (EBF) for testing random effects. Instead of testing whether a variance component equals zero, the EBF evaluates the equivalent hypothesis that all random effects are zero. The approach avoids manual prior specification: the distribution of the random effects is modeled at the lower level and estimated directly from the data, yielding an "empirical" Bayes factor. Using a Savage-Dickey density ratio, the EBF requires only the full model fit, eliminating the need to estimate multiple models with alternative random-effects structures. The method enables testing a single random effect as well as multiple, potentially correlated, random effects simultaneously. Simulation studies examine the operating characteristics of the criterion. To illustrate its breadth, the EBF is applied to several widely used models in psychological research and related fields, including generalized linear crossed mixed-effects models, spatial random-effects models, dynamic structural equation models, random-intercept cross-lagged panel models, and nonlinear mixed-effects models.

British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.