Ignoring uncertainty in predictor variables leads to false confidence in results: a case study of duck habitat use

Abstract An assumption of most regression analyses is that independent variables are measured without error. However, in ecological studies it is common to use independent variables that are derived from samples and therefore contain some uncertainty. For example, when assessing the assumption that...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Adam C. Behney
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2020-10-01
Series:Ecosphere
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.3273
id doaj-adfd020aed8644a3b15d99699a1dd72d
record_format Article
spelling doaj-adfd020aed8644a3b15d99699a1dd72d2020-11-25T01:40:41ZengWileyEcosphere2150-89252020-10-011110n/an/a10.1002/ecs2.3273Ignoring uncertainty in predictor variables leads to false confidence in results: a case study of duck habitat useAdam C. Behney0Avian Research Section Colorado Parks and Wildlife 317 W Prospect Road Fort Collins Colorado80526USAAbstract An assumption of most regression analyses is that independent variables are measured without error. However, in ecological studies it is common to use independent variables that are derived from samples and therefore contain some uncertainty. For example, when assessing the assumption that energy availability on the landscape is the primary driver of duck distribution during nonbreeding seasons, investigators typically sample energy availability at sites and use the site‐level means as a covariate to predict duck abundance. This strategy ignores uncertainty in the estimates of energy availability, which should be propagated into estimates of effects and predicted values of the response variable. I used Bayesian hierarchical models to include uncertainty in site‐level covariates when modeling dabbling duck count data during the spring in northeastern Colorado, USA. I found that even after accounting for uncertainty in energy availability, it was an important predictor of dabbling duck use of sites. Counts were greater at sites with more energy available; however, credible intervals were substantially wider when uncertainty in predictor variables was included. Therefore, ignoring uncertainty leads to overly precise model outputs. Furthermore, I found that larger sites and those further east also supported more dabbling ducks. Using a sample as a covariate is common in ecological studies, and researchers can use the methods outlined here to account for this additional level of uncertainty. These case study results can be used by habitat managers and planners to guide how and where wetland restoration occurs with a more accurate idea of the uncertainty associated with various effects.https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.3273BayesianColoradoduckshabitat selectionhierarchical modelsuncertainty
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Adam C. Behney
spellingShingle Adam C. Behney
Ignoring uncertainty in predictor variables leads to false confidence in results: a case study of duck habitat use
Ecosphere
Bayesian
Colorado
ducks
habitat selection
hierarchical models
uncertainty
author_facet Adam C. Behney
author_sort Adam C. Behney
title Ignoring uncertainty in predictor variables leads to false confidence in results: a case study of duck habitat use
title_short Ignoring uncertainty in predictor variables leads to false confidence in results: a case study of duck habitat use
title_full Ignoring uncertainty in predictor variables leads to false confidence in results: a case study of duck habitat use
title_fullStr Ignoring uncertainty in predictor variables leads to false confidence in results: a case study of duck habitat use
title_full_unstemmed Ignoring uncertainty in predictor variables leads to false confidence in results: a case study of duck habitat use
title_sort ignoring uncertainty in predictor variables leads to false confidence in results: a case study of duck habitat use
publisher Wiley
series Ecosphere
issn 2150-8925
publishDate 2020-10-01
description Abstract An assumption of most regression analyses is that independent variables are measured without error. However, in ecological studies it is common to use independent variables that are derived from samples and therefore contain some uncertainty. For example, when assessing the assumption that energy availability on the landscape is the primary driver of duck distribution during nonbreeding seasons, investigators typically sample energy availability at sites and use the site‐level means as a covariate to predict duck abundance. This strategy ignores uncertainty in the estimates of energy availability, which should be propagated into estimates of effects and predicted values of the response variable. I used Bayesian hierarchical models to include uncertainty in site‐level covariates when modeling dabbling duck count data during the spring in northeastern Colorado, USA. I found that even after accounting for uncertainty in energy availability, it was an important predictor of dabbling duck use of sites. Counts were greater at sites with more energy available; however, credible intervals were substantially wider when uncertainty in predictor variables was included. Therefore, ignoring uncertainty leads to overly precise model outputs. Furthermore, I found that larger sites and those further east also supported more dabbling ducks. Using a sample as a covariate is common in ecological studies, and researchers can use the methods outlined here to account for this additional level of uncertainty. These case study results can be used by habitat managers and planners to guide how and where wetland restoration occurs with a more accurate idea of the uncertainty associated with various effects.
topic Bayesian
Colorado
ducks
habitat selection
hierarchical models
uncertainty
url https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.3273
work_keys_str_mv AT adamcbehney ignoringuncertaintyinpredictorvariablesleadstofalseconfidenceinresultsacasestudyofduckhabitatuse
_version_ 1725044156582068224