2

I want to analyse the distance covered by players per minute (TD_min) among player role and playing phase (possession, non possession). Main question is: does possession phase influence distance covered by players in different role? IE, does distance covered by DC differs according to phase? The same for CC etc

I have the following mixed model with interaction, but I am not sure how to interpret it

TD_min ~ Fase * Ruolo + (1 | Partita) + (1 | Giocatore)

Ruolo is categorical (DC, FB, CC, ES, AT) and Fase is categorical (P, NP). Results are compared against DC and NP.

Results are the following

Formula: TD_min ~ Fase * Ruolo + (1 | Partita) + (1 | Giocatore)
   Data: data
 AIC      BIC   logLik deviance df.resid 

3994.6 4050.3 -1984.3 3968.6 525

Scaled residuals: Min 1Q Median 3Q Max -3.4758 -0.6044 -0.0646 0.6251 3.9107

Random effects: Groups Name Variance Std.Dev. Partita (Intercept) 56.75 7.533
Giocatore (Intercept) 29.22 5.405
Residual 73.21 8.556
Number of obs: 538, groups: Partita, 34; Giocatore, 21

Fixed effects: Estimate Std. Error t value (Intercept) 140.7730 2.9531 47.670 FaseP -20.7943 1.4674 -14.171 RuoloFB 5.1787 4.2384 1.222 RuoloCC 24.0475 3.4692 6.932 RuoloES 5.4434 4.3090 1.263 RuoloAT 0.1933 5.1367 0.038 FaseP:RuoloFB 0.5874 2.1074 0.279 FaseP:RuoloCC 2.2702 1.9180 1.184 FaseP:RuoloES 14.8159 2.8730 5.157 FaseP:RuoloAT 18.6357 3.2812 5.679

Correlation of Fixed Effects: (Intr) FaseP RuolFB RuolCC RuolES RuolAT FP:RFB FP:RCC FP:RES FaseP -0.248
RuoloFB -0.563 0.173
RuoloCC -0.688 0.211 0.479
RuoloES -0.553 0.170 0.385 0.470
RuoloAT -0.465 0.143 0.324 0.396 0.324
FaseP:RulFB 0.173 -0.696 -0.249 -0.147 -0.119 -0.099
FaseP:RulCC 0.190 -0.765 -0.132 -0.276 -0.130 -0.109 0.533
FaseP:RulES 0.127 -0.511 -0.088 -0.108 -0.333 -0.073 0.356 0.391
FaseP:RulAT 0.111 -0.447 -0.077 -0.095 -0.076 -0.319 0.311 0.342 0.228

I am ok with interpreting the fixed models without interaction (ie from FaseP to RuoloAT), but am not sure how I can interpret the others? Also I don't know what the correlation of fixed effects means.

I found other similar questions but it's still unclear. Thanks

1 Answers1

1

If you don't know how to interpret the interaction terms that it is likely that you also do not know how to interpret the main effects, since this is not the same as with a model without the interaction. The main point is that when a model includes an interaction term - which simply allows the "effect" of one variable to differ at different levels of the other variable - the main effect of one variable is conditional on the variable that it is interacted with being zero (or at it's reference level in the case of a categotorical variable. So:

  • The intercept is the expected value of TD_min when Fase is zero and Ruolo is at it's reference level.

  • The main effect for Fase is the slope of Fase when Ruolo is at it's reference level. The individual main effects for the categories of Ruolo are the estimated differences between TD_min at the reference level, and each estimated level, when Fase is zero. For example, the diference between TD_min when Ruolo is at it's reference level and when Ruolo is at FB is 5.1787 when Fase is kept at zero.

  • The interaction terms are the differences in the slope for Fase for each level of Ruolo, compared to the reference level of Ruolo

There are many many similar questions with answers on this site. It is not relevant that this is a mixed model. Just look for any question on the interpretation of models with an interaction between a continuous and categorical variable. For example:
interaction of categorical and continuous variables
How should I implement this interaction between a continuous and categorical predictor?
Interaction Terms (Categorical * Continuous)

Robert Long
  • 60,630
  • Thank you, very clear. Howevei I still have one doubt. I want to evaluate the difference of TD_min for each level of Ruolo according to Fase. For example, I want to compare TD_min of subjects with the same Ruolo when Fase is at its reference value vs TD_min of subjects with the same Ruolo when Fase is NOT at its reference value. I can't understand how to do that – FrAiello May 17 '21 at 10:20
  • Fase doesn't have a reference level. It's continuous, so you should think in terms of it's slope. – Robert Long May 17 '21 at 14:38
  • Does this answer your question ? If so then please consider marking it as a the accepted answer and (if you haven't already) upvoting it. If not, please could you let us know why so that it can be improved – Robert Long Jun 04 '21 at 14:51