Table 5.
Estimation approach | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Variance | Sample size | Entropy | ML_E | ML_U | BCH | LTB |
Equal | 100 | .5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
.6 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||
.7 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||
.8 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||
200 | .5 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
.6 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||
.7 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||
.8 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||
500 | .5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
.6 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||
.7 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||
.8 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||
1,000 | .5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
.6 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||
.7 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||
.8 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||
Unequal | 100 | .5 | 2.2 | 11.6 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
.6 | 4.0 | 8.4 | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||
.7 | 6.2 | 2.8 | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||
.8 | 6.2 | 0.8 | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||
200 | .5 | 9.8 | 23.6 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
.6 | 9.8 | 13.4 | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||
.7 | 8.2 | 2.8 | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||
.8 | 5.4 | 1.2 | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||
500 | .5 | 19.6 | 24.2 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
.6 | 12.8 | 8.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||
.7 | 7.6 | 1.6 | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||
.8 | 3.2 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||
1,000 | .5 | 15.8 | 18.4 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
.6 | 9.2 | 1.6 | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||
.7 | 3.6 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||
.8 | 0.8 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
Note. ML = maximum likelihood–based approach (Vermunt, 2010); BCH = BCH approach, named after the developers Bolck, Croon, and Hagennarrs (Bolck et al., 2004; Vermunt, 2010); LTB = LTB approach, named after the developers Lanza, Tan, and Bray (Lanza et al., 2013); ML_E = ML approach assuming equal variance among classes; ML_U = ML approach assuming unequal variance among classes.