Literature DB >> 29300105

Misspecification in Latent Change Score Models: Consequences for Parameter Estimation, Model Evaluation, and Predicting Change.

D Angus Clark1, Amy K Nuttall1, Ryan P Bowles1.   

Abstract

Latent change score models (LCS) are conceptually powerful tools for analyzing longitudinal data (McArdle & Hamagami, 2001). However, applications of these models typically include constraints on key parameters over time. Although practically useful, strict invariance over time in these parameters is unlikely in real data. This study investigates the robustness of LCS when invariance over time is incorrectly imposed on key change-related parameters. Monte Carlo simulation methods were used to explore the impact of misspecification on parameter estimation, predicted trajectories of change, and model fit in the dual change score model, the foundational LCS. When constraints were incorrectly applied, several parameters, most notably the slope (i.e., constant change) factor mean and autoproportion coefficient, were severely and consistently biased, as were regression paths to the slope factor when external predictors of change were included. Standard fit indices indicated that the misspecified models fit well, partly because mean level trajectories over time were accurately captured. Loosening constraint improved the accuracy of parameter estimates, but estimates were more unstable, and models frequently failed to converge. Results suggest that potentially common sources of misspecification in LCS can produce distorted impressions of developmental processes, and that identifying and rectifying the situation is a challenge.

Keywords:  Bias; latent change score; longitudinal data analysis; misspecification; model fit

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29300105     DOI: 10.1080/00273171.2017.1409612

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


  5 in total

1.  Study Length, Change Process Separability, Parameter Estimation, and Model Evaluation in Hybrid Autoregressive-Latent Growth Structural Equation Models for Longitudinal Data.

Authors:  D Angus Clark; Amy K Nuttall; Ryan P Bowles
Journal:  Int J Behav Dev       Date:  2021-06-16

2.  Modeling Latent Change Score Analysis and Extensions in Mplus: A Practical Guide for Researchers.

Authors:  Eric T Klopack; Kandauda K A S Wickrama
Journal:  Struct Equ Modeling       Date:  2019-04-25       Impact factor: 6.125

3.  Mapping differential responses to cognitive training using machine learning.

Authors:  Joseph P Rennie; Mengya Zhang; Erin Hawkins; Joe Bathelt; Duncan E Astle
Journal:  Dev Sci       Date:  2019-07-22

4.  lcsm: An R package and tutorial on latent change score modelling.

Authors:  Milan Wiedemann; Graham Thew; Urška Košir; Anke Ehlers
Journal:  Wellcome Open Res       Date:  2022-05-11

5.  Testing prospective effects in longitudinal research: Comparing seven competing cross-lagged models.

Authors:  Ulrich Orth; D Angus Clark; M Brent Donnellan; Richard W Robins
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  2020-07-30
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.