Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 15, 2026

Development of an Individual-Tree Basal Area Increment Model using a Linear Mixed-Effects Approach
Published on: July 3, 2020
Clarifying the use of aggregated exposures in multilevel models: self-included vs. self-excluded measures
Etsuji Suzuki1, Eiji Yamamoto, Soshi Takao
1Department of Epidemiology, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama, Japan. etsuji-s@cc.okayama-u.ac.jp
Background:
Multilevel analyses are ideally suited to assess the effects of ecological (higher level) and individual (lower level) exposure variables simultaneously. In applying such analyses to measures of ecologies in epidemiological studies, individual variables are usually aggregated into the higher level unit. Typically, the aggregated measure includes responses of every individual belonging to that group (i.e. it constitutes a self-included measure). More recently, researchers have developed an aggregate measure which excludes the response of the individual to whom the aggregate measure is linked (i.e. a self-excluded measure). In this study, we clarify the substantive and technical properties of these two measures when they are used as exposures in multilevel models.
Methods:
Although the differences between the two aggregated measures are mathematically subtle, distinguishing between them is important in terms of the specific scientific questions to be addressed. We then show how these measures can be used in two distinct types of multilevel models-self-included model and self-excluded model-and interpret the parameters in each model by imposing hypothetical interventions. The concept is tested on empirical data of workplace social capital and employees' systolic blood pressure.
Results:
Researchers assume group-level interventions when using a self-included model, and individual-level interventions when using a self-excluded model. Analytical re-parameterizations of these two models highlight their differences in parameter interpretation. Cluster-mean centered self-included models enable researchers to decompose the collective effect into its within- and between-group components. The benefit of cluster-mean centering procedure is further discussed in terms of hypothetical interventions.
Conclusions:
When investigating the potential roles of aggregated variables, researchers should carefully explore which type of model-self-included or self-excluded-is suitable for a given situation, particularly when group sizes are relatively small.
Related Concept Videos
Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding
Confounding can be addressed at both the design phase of a study and through analytical methods after data...
Confounding in Epidemiological Studies
In- and Out-Groups
Group Design
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...
Strategies of Self-Presentation III: Self-Monitoring
