Source-linked AI summary

Linear models and linear mixed effects models in R with linguistic applications

Bodo Winter

arXiv:1308.5499v1cs.CL

TL;DR

Linguistic data contain repeated subject and item observations, challenging independence assumptions and allowing effects to vary across subjects and items. The paper introduces linear mixed-effects models in R using voice pitch and politeness, showing that politeness lowered pitch by about 19.7 Hz.

  • Problem

    Repeated observations violate independence, while politeness effects may differ across subjects and items.

  • Method

    The paper uses mixed models with subject and item random effects, random slopes, and likelihood ratio tests to model variation and assess effects.

  • Results

    19.7 Hz ± 5.6: politeness affected pitch, lowering it significantly (χ2(1)=11.62, p=0.00065).

  • Takeaways & Limitations

    Mixed models account for subject and item variation simultaneously while retaining the full data rather than averaging over either source.

  • Takeaways & Limitations

    Mixed models can still violate independence when important fixed effects are missing.

Abstract

from arXiv · show

This text is a conceptual introduction to mixed effects modeling with linguistic applications, using the R programming environment. The reader is introduced to linear modeling and assumptions, as well as to mixed effects/multilevel modeling, including a discussion of random intercepts, random slopes and likelihood ratio tests. The example used throughout the text focuses on the phonetic analysis of voice pitch data.

Part 2: A very basic tutorial for performing

The tutorial presents mixed models as a way to model subject- and item-specific dependence by combining fixed effects with structured random effects. Using voice-pitch data, it demonstrates politeness and gender effects, likelihood-ratio testing, random slopes, and reproducible reporting.

  • Why mixed models: Repeated responses from the same subject or item are non-independent, so mixed models account for both sources of variation in one analysis.Individual voice-pitch differences affect all responses from a subject, while items can also systematically differ.
  • Why mixed models: Mixed models combine fixed effects with random effects that structure the error term and represent idiosyncratic variation due to subjects or items.This mixture distinguishes mixed models from fixed-effects-only models with a general, unstructured error term.
  • Voice-pitch example: In the voice-pitch example, polite speech lowers pitch by about 19.7 Hz, with politeness affecting pitch (χ2(1)=11.62, p=0.00065).The model describes frequency as pitch measured in Hertz, with higher values indicating higher pitch.
  • Voice-pitch example: Adding gender shows that males and females differ by about 109 Hz, while the intercept becomes 256.846 Hz for females in the informal condition.Including gender also reduces subject-associated random variation because gender had previously been confounded with subject variation.
  • Model comparison: Likelihood-ratio tests compare a null model without the factor of interest against a model containing it, but joint comparisons cannot identify which added factor explains significance.Comparing an intercept-only model with a full model containing attitude and gender tests their combined difference rather than either effect separately.
  • Random effects: Random-intercept models allow subject- and item-specific baselines while holding politeness effects constant, whereas random-slope models allow those effects to vary.The example finds politeness coefficients negative across subjects and items, indicating a consistent downward pitch tendency despite individual variation.
Loading 1308.5499v1…