Literature DB >> 26777445

Have Multilevel Models Been Structural Equation Models All Along?

Patrick J Curran.   

Abstract

A core assumption of the standard multiple regression model is independence of residuals, the violation of which results in biased standard errors and test statistics. The structural equation model (SEM) generalizes the regression model in several key ways, but the SEM also assumes independence of residuals. The multilevel model (MLM) was developed to extend the regression model to dependent data structures. Attempts have been made to extend the SEM in similar ways, but several complications currently limit the general application of these techniques in practice. Interestingly, it is well known that under a broad set of conditions SEM and MLM longitudinal "growth curve" models are analytically and empirically identical. This is intriguing given the clear violation of independence in growth modeling that does not detrimentally affect the standard SEM. Better understanding the source and potential implications of this isomorphism is my focus here. I begin by exploring why SEM and MLM are analytically equivalent methods in the presence of nesting due to repeated observations over time. I then capitalize on this equivalency to allow for the extension of SEMs to a general class of nested data structures. I conclude with a description of potential opportunities for multilevel SEMs and directions for future developments.

Entities:  

Year:  2003        PMID: 26777445     DOI: 10.1207/s15327906mbr3804_5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Multivariate Behav Res        ISSN: 0027-3171            Impact factor:   5.923


  37 in total

1.  The SF-36 component summary scales and the daytime diurnal cortisol profile.

Authors:  Gareth Edward Hagger-Johnson; Martha C Whiteman; Andrew J Wawrzyniak; Warren G Holroyd
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2010-03-24       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  Multilevel mediation analysis: The effects of omitted variables in the 1-1-1 model.

Authors:  Davood Tofighi; Stephen G West; David P MacKinnon
Journal:  Br J Math Stat Psychol       Date:  2012-05-18       Impact factor: 3.380

3.  Behavioral control and resiliency in the onset of alcohol and illicit drug use: a prospective study from preschool to adolescence.

Authors:  Maria M Wong; Joel T Nigg; Robert A Zucker; Leon I Puttler; Hiram E Fitzgerald; Jennifer M Jester; Jennifer M Glass; Kenneth Adams
Journal:  Child Dev       Date:  2006 Jul-Aug

4.  Approaches to modeling the development of physiological stress responsivity.

Authors:  J Benjamin Hinnant; Lauren E Philbrook; Stephen A Erath; Mona El-Sheikh
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  2017-10-31       Impact factor: 4.016

5.  Fluctuating Team Science: Perceiving Science as Collaborative Improves Science Motivation.

Authors:  Jill Allen; Jessi L Smith; Dustin B Thoman; Ryan W Walters
Journal:  Motiv Sci       Date:  2018-03-12

6.  Profile Likelihood-Based Confidence Intervals and Regions for Structural Equation Models.

Authors:  Jolynn Pek; Hao Wu
Journal:  Psychometrika       Date:  2015-04-30       Impact factor: 2.500

7.  Correcting Model Fit Criteria for Small Sample Latent Growth Models With Incomplete Data.

Authors:  Daniel McNeish; Jeffrey R Harring
Journal:  Educ Psychol Meas       Date:  2016-08-01       Impact factor: 2.821

8.  Exploring factors influencing residents' health outcomes in long-term care facilities: 1-year follow-up using latent growth curve model.

Authors:  Li-Fan Liu; Rhay-Hung Weng; Jiun-Yu Wu
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2014-05-17       Impact factor: 4.147

9.  Raw Data Maximum Likelihood Estimation for Common Principal Component Models: A State Space Approach.

Authors:  Fei Gu; Hao Wu
Journal:  Psychometrika       Date:  2016-06-30       Impact factor: 2.500

10.  Sensitivity Analysis of the No-Omitted Confounder Assumption in Latent Growth Curve Mediation Models.

Authors:  Davood Tofighi; Yu-Yu Hsiao; Eric S Kruger; David P MacKinnon; M Lee Van Horn; Katie A Witkiewitz
Journal:  Struct Equ Modeling       Date:  2018-09-11       Impact factor: 6.125

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.