| Title |
A single-level random-effects cross-lagged panel model for longitudinal mediation analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Behavior Research Methods, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3758/s13428-017-0979-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Wei Wu, Ian A. Carroll, Po-Yi Chen |
| Abstract |
Cross-lagged panel models (CLPMs) are widely used to test mediation with longitudinal panel data. One major limitation of the CLPMs is that the model effects are assumed to be fixed across individuals. This assumption is likely to be violated (i.e., the model effects are random across individuals) in practice. When this happens, the CLPMs can potentially yield biased parameter estimates and misleading statistical inferences. This article proposes a model named a random-effects cross-lagged panel model (RE-CLPM) to account for random effects in CLPMs. Simulation studies show that the RE-CLPM outperforms the CLPM in recovering the mean indirect and direct effects in a longitudinal mediation analysis when random effects exist in the population. The performance of the RE-CLPM is robust to a certain degree, even when the random effects are not normally distributed. In addition, the RE-CLPM does not produce harmful results when the model effects are in fact fixed in the population. Implications of the simulation studies and potential directions for future research are discussed. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 130 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 130 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 36 | 28% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 10% |
| Researcher | 12 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 26 | 20% |
| Unknown | 25 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 55 | 42% |
| Social Sciences | 15 | 12% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 9 | 7% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 13 | 10% |
| Unknown | 31 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 January 2023.
All research outputs
#19,951,180
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Behavior Research Methods
#1,896
of 2,526 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#321,479
of 446,025 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Behavior Research Methods
#23
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,526 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 446,025 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.