The proportion of effects p caused by customers' responsive behavior and adjustment range D for u can be described in (28)–(31).
In Figure 1 we give the power of SGoF (defined as the proportion of effects detected among the 100 existing ones) as well as the FDR for a grid of γ values ranging from 0.01 to 0.99.
Genetic heterogeneity will thus decrease the proportion of effects in the extreme upper and lower tails of the distribution.
Another possibility is to link the proportion of effects coming from the "small-variance" component with the proportion of variance accounted for.
To prevent the so-called label-switching problem a common approach is to restrict σ β 1 2 ≤ σ β 2 2 so that π can be interpreted as the proportion of effects coming from the "small" variance component.
In addition, the proportions of effects caused by structure degradation and the surface layer for single electrodes are calculated respectively.
The proportion of indirect effect to total effect of extraversion/agreeableness/conscientiousness/neuroticism was 25.42%, 10.91%, 32.21% and 36.44%, respectively.
The ratio of indirect to total effects is the proportion of the effect attributable to the mediator.
To evaluate the importance of the mediation it can be informative to calculate the proportion of the effect owing to mediation as the indirect effect divided by the total effect as a×b/c.
