Literature DB >> 35391756

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

D Angus Clark1, Amy K Nuttall2, Ryan P Bowles2.   

Abstract

Hybrid autoregressive-latent growth structural equation models for longitudinal data represent a synthesis of the autoregressive and latent growth modeling frameworks. Although these models are conceptually powerful, in practice they may struggle to separate autoregressive and growth related processes during estimation. This confounding of change processes may, in turn, increase the risk of the models producing deceptively compelling results (i.e., models that fit excellently by conventional standards despite highly biased parameter estimates). Including additional time points provides models with more raw information about change, which could help improve process separability and the accuracy of parameter estimates to a degree. This study thus used Monte Carlo simulation methods to examine associations between change process separability, the number of time points in a model, and the consequences of misspecification, across three prominent hybrid autoregressive-latent growth models: the Latent Change Score model (LCS; McArdle, 2001), the Autoregressive Latent Trajectory Model (ALT; Bollen & Curran, 2006), and the Latent Growth Model with Structured Residuals (LGM-SR; Curran et al., 2014). Results showed that including more time points increased process separability and robustness to misspecification in the LCS and ALT, but typically not at a rate that would be practically feasible for most developmental researchers. Alternatively, regardless of how many time points were in the model process separability was high in the LGM-SR, as was robustness to misspecification. Overall, results suggest that the LGM-SR is the most effective of the three hybrid autoregressive-latent growth models considered here.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Asymptotic Covariance; Autoregressive Latent Trajectory Model; Bias; Latent Change Score Model; Latent Growth Model with Structured Residuals

Year:  2021        PMID: 35391756      PMCID: PMC8986125          DOI: 10.1177/01650254211022862

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Behav Dev        ISSN: 0165-0254


  9 in total

1.  The Importance of Temporal Design: How Do Measurement Intervals Affect the Accuracy and Efficiency of Parameter Estimates in Longitudinal Research?

Authors:  Adela C Timmons; Kristopher J Preacher
Journal:  Multivariate Behav Res       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 5.923

2.  On the Mathematical Relationship Between Latent Change Score and Autoregressive Cross-Lagged Factor Approaches: Cautions for Inferring Causal Relationship Between Variables.

Authors:  Satoshi Usami; Timothy Hayes; John J McArdle
Journal:  Multivariate Behav Res       Date:  2015-11-17       Impact factor: 5.923

3.  Reconsidering the Use of Autoregressive Latent Trajectory (ALT) Models.

Authors:  Manuel C Voelkle
Journal:  Multivariate Behav Res       Date:  2008 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 5.923

4.  A critique of the cross-lagged panel model.

Authors:  Ellen L Hamaker; Rebecca M Kuiper; Raoul P P P Grasman
Journal:  Psychol Methods       Date:  2015-03

5.  A unified framework of longitudinal models to examine reciprocal relations.

Authors:  Satoshi Usami; Kou Murayama; Ellen L Hamaker
Journal:  Psychol Methods       Date:  2019-04-18

6.  (Re)evaluating the Implications of the Autoregressive Latent Trajectory Model Through Likelihood Ratio Tests of Its Initial Conditions.

Authors:  Lu Ou; Sy-Miin Chow; Linying Ji; Peter C M Molenaar
Journal:  Multivariate Behav Res       Date:  2016-12-16       Impact factor: 5.923

Review 7.  On the Practical Interpretability of Cross-Lagged Panel Models: Rethinking a Developmental Workhorse.

Authors:  Daniel Berry; Michael T Willoughby
Journal:  Child Dev       Date:  2016-11-23

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

Authors:  D Angus Clark; Amy K Nuttall; Ryan P Bowles
Journal:  Multivariate Behav Res       Date:  2018-01-04       Impact factor: 5.923

9.  The separation of between-person and within-person components of individual change over time: a latent curve model with structured residuals.

Authors:  Patrick J Curran; Andrea L Howard; Sierra A Bainter; Stephanie T Lane; James S McGinley
Journal:  J Consult Clin Psychol       Date:  2013-12-23
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.