Two-wave Two-variable Models David A. Kenny December 24, 2013.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Working with Under-identified Structural Equation Models
Advertisements

Autocorrelation Functions and ARIMA Modelling
Financial Econometrics
Cross-lagged Panel Models
Test of Distinguishability
The STARTS Model David A. Kenny December 15, 2013.
SEM PURPOSE Model phenomena from observed or theoretical stances
Structural Equation Modeling
Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) Niina Kotamäki.
Structural Equation Modeling: An Overview P. Paxton.
1 General Structural Equation (LISREL) Models Week #2 Class #2.
Mediation and Moderation It’s a multivariate world out there… Todd D. Little, Director Institute for Measurement, Methodology, Analysis and Policy.
Standardized Change Score Analysis David A. Kenny December 15, 2013.
APIM with Distinguishable Dyads: SEM Estimation
Moderation: Assumptions
Structural Equation Modeling
 Confounders are usually controlled with the “standard” response regression model.  The standard model includes confounders as covariates in the response.
Regulatory Network (Part II) 11/05/07. Methods Linear –PCA (Raychaudhuri et al. 2000) –NIR (Gardner et al. 2003) Nonlinear –Bayesian network (Friedman.
Structural Equation Modeling
The Autoregressive Model of Change David A. Kenny.
Change Score Analysis David A. Kenny December 15, 2013.
Structural Equation Modeling Intro to SEM Psy 524 Ainsworth.
An Introduction to HLM and SEM
Example Models for Multi-wave Data David A. Kenny December 15, 2013.
Moderation: Introduction
Statistical Models for the Analysis of Brain Connectivity Based on fMRI Data Yoshio Takane McGill University and University of Victoria September 19, 2013.
Dynamical Correlation: A New Method to Quantify Synchrony Siwei Liu 1, Yang Zhou 1, Richard Palumbo 2, & Jane-Ling Wang 1 1 UC Davis; 2 University of Rhode.
Correlational Designs
CJT 765: Structural Equation Modeling Class 7: fitting a model, fit indices, comparingmodels, statistical power.
SEM: Basics Byrne Chapter 1 Tabachnick SEM
Cross-lagged Panel Correlation (CLPC) David A. Kenny December 25, 2013.
1 Analysis Consequences of Dependent Measurement Problems in Research on Older Couples Jason T. Newsom Institute on Aging Portland State University Presented.
CJT 765: Structural Equation Modeling Class 10: Non-recursive Models.
Confirmatory Factor Analysis Psych 818 DeShon. Construct Validity: MTMM ● Assessed via convergent and divergent evidence ● Convergent – Measures of the.
Full Structural Models Kline Chapter 10 Brown Chapter 5 ( )
Mediation: Solutions to Assumption Violation
CJT 765: Structural Equation Modeling Class 12: Wrap Up: Latent Growth Models, Pitfalls, Critique and Future Directions for SEM.
Mediation: The Four Steps David A. Kenny davidakenny.net.
Discussion of time series and panel models
Controlling for Baseline
In late 2003, Jost and colleagues received death threats for publishing a paper that said that being politically conservative served a number of ‘existential.
G Lecture 81 Comparing Measurement Models across Groups Reducing Bias with Hybrid Models Setting the Scale of Latent Variables Thinking about Hybrid.
SEM: Basics Byrne Chapter 1 Tabachnick SEM
SEM Basics 2 Byrne Chapter 2 Kline pg 7-15, 50-51, ,
Social Relations Model: Multiple Variables David A. Kenny.
Biostatistics in Practice Session 5: Associations and confounding Youngju Pak, Ph.D. Biostatisticianhttp://research.LABioMed.org/Biostat 1.
Single-Subject and Correlational Research Bring Schraw et al.
Authoritarianism and anomia reconsidered: applying cross-lagged autoregressive & latent growth curve models.
Definitions in Dyadic Data Analysis David A. Kenny February 18, 2013.
Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Longitudinal Data David A. Kenny December
Section Copyright © 2014, 2012, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Lecture Slides Elementary Statistics Twelfth Edition and the Triola Statistics Series.
Mediation: The Causal Inference Approach David A. Kenny.
1 Comments Yutaka Kano Osaka University
Authoritarianism and anomia reconsidered: applying cross-lagged autoregressive & latent growth curve models Dipl.-Soz. Elmar Schlüter Philipps-University.
Copyright © 2012 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Chapter 18 Multivariate Statistics.
CJT 765: Structural Equation Modeling Final Lecture: Multiple-Group Models, a Word about Latent Growth Models, Pitfalls, Critique and Future Directions.
Chapter 17 STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM)  Relatively new statistical technique used to test theoretical or causal.
Dr. Richard Charnigo Professor of Statistics and Biostatistics 07 December 2015.
Testing the Equality of Means and Variances in Over-Time Data David A. Kenny.
Mediation: Assumptions David A. Kenny davidakenny.net.
Segment 1: Actor-Partner Models vs. Common-Fate Models
Two-wave Two-variable Models
CJT 765: Structural Equation Modeling
The Trait Model of Change
Class 8 Spring 2017 Ang &Huan (2006)
عنوان عنوان فرعی.
Social Relations Model: Estimation of Relationship Effects
Special Topic: Longitudinal Mediation Analysis
James G. Anderson, Ph.D. Purdue University
Structural Equation Modeling
Presentation transcript:

Two-wave Two-variable Models David A. Kenny December 24, 2013

2 The Basic Design Two variables Measured at two times Gives rise to 4 variables Say Depression and Marital Satisfaction are measured for wives with a separation of one year. We have D 1, D 2, S 1, and S 2.

3 Standard Cross-lagged Regression Model Time 1 variables cause Time 2 variables. –Two stabilities S1  S2 D1  D2 –Two cross-lagged effects S1  D2 D1  S2 Time 2 disturbances correlated. Inadvisable to have paths between Time 2 variables (S2  D2 or D2  S2)

4

5 Causal Preponderance Is S a stronger cause of D than is D of S? No easy way because the units of measurement of S and D are likely very different. Can standardize all the variables, but as will be seen this is more difficult when S and D are latent.

6 Assumptions No measurement error in S 1 and D 1. (Ironically, OK if there is measurement error in S 2 and D 2.) Nothing that causes both the time 1 variable and the time 2 variables. Such a variable is sometimes called a confounder. So if there is a gender (and gender is not controlled) difference at time 1, once we control for S 1 and D 1, there are no remaining gender differences at time 2 in S or D. The lagged effect of variables is exactly the length of measurement.

7 What to Do about the Assumptions? Measurement error in S 1 and D 1 : –Latent variable analysis (discussed in a latter slide). Confounders –Measure them. –Sensitivity analysis: See how the results change assuming confounders. Wrong lag –Multi-wave study can be used to establish the optimal lag.

8 Latent Variables Can have as few as two indicators per latent variable. Correlate errors of the same indicator measured at different times. Test to see if loadings do not change over time.

9

10 Causal Preponderance Note that even if the Time 1 latent variables are standardized, the Time 2 ones are not. –One can standardize disturbances (U and V in the figure), but cannot standardize latent endogenous variables (S2 and D2). One can through a series on non-linear constraints standardized latent endogenous variables, it is very complicated. However, the SEM program laavan does have an option to standardize all latent variables (std.lv=TRUE).

11 Depression and Marital Satisfaction Example Gustavson, K. B. et al. (2012). Reciprocal longitudinal associations between depressive symptoms and romantic partners' synchronized view of relationship quality. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 29,