2
$\begingroup$

I've got measurements from two different types of sites, lets call them "Source" and "Sensor", with a proportion measure for each ranging from 0 to 1, like so:

Source, Sensor
0.25, 0.34
0.05, 0.72
0.38, 0.26

There's some interest in finding out if Sensor could be used as a proxy for Source, as Source is much more difficult to collect samples in. The two measurements are paired, so it makes sense to me to just use an ICC agreement statistic.

Here's the rub: In addition to multiple samples of each type of site, there's potentially multiple visits to the actual sites. So for example, the data actually looks like:

SourceID, Source, Sensor
A, 0.25, 0.34
A, 0.17, 0.28
A, 0.19, 0.45
B, 0.06, 0.72
C, 0.38, 0.26
D, 0.89, 0.97
D, 0.73, 0.85
E, 0.17, 0.19

I'd like to leverage those multiple visits, but of course now all the observations aren't independent, and there are some repeated measures. Is there a way to handle ICC with repeated measures?

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ If I understand ICC correctly you could get a high value even if one was systematically higher than the other by a small amount compared to the differences between pairs. Does that matter to you in your application as you say you want to use one as a surrogate for the other? $\endgroup$
    – mdewey
    Commented Aug 29, 2016 at 16:13
  • $\begingroup$ @mdewey A problem with some exploration, but provisionally, there are still applications where it would be useful even if one was systematically higher. $\endgroup$
    – Fomite
    Commented Aug 29, 2016 at 19:56

1 Answer 1

1
+50
$\begingroup$

You can do this using the tools from generalizability theory. You can think of these as extensions of the ICC that allow for multiple sources of variation (e.g., source of measurement and repeated measures).

Brennan, R. L. (2001). Generalizability Theory. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Cronbach, L.J., Nageswari, R., & Gleser, G.C. (1963). Theory of generalizability: A liberation of reliability theory. The British Journal of Statistical Psychology, 16, 137-163.

Shavelson, R.J., & Webb, N.M. (1991). Generalizability Theory: A Primer. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.