Residual Structural Equation Models

References

• Anton, R. F., O’Malley, S. S., Ciraulo, D. A., Cisler, R. A., Couper, D., Donovan, D. M., Gastfriend, D. R., Hosking, J. D., Johnson, B. A., J. S., LoCastro, Longabaugh, R., Mason, B. J., Mattson, M. E., Miller, W. R., Pettinati, H. M., Randall, C. L., Swift, R., Weiss, R. D., Williams, L. D., Zweben, A. (2006). Combined pharmacotherapies and behavioral interventions for alcohol dependence: The COMBINE study: A randomized controlled trial. JAMA, 295, 2003–2017. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.295.17.2003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asparouhov, T., Hamaker, E. L., & Muthén, B. (2018). Dynamic structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 25, 359–388. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2017.1406803
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. (2008). Auxiliary Variables Predicting Missing Data. Mplus Technical Appendices. http://www.statmodel.com/download/AuxM2.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. (2010). Bayesian analysis using Mplus: Technical implementation. Technical appendix. Muthén & Muthén. http://www.statmodel.com/download/Bayes3.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. O. (2011). Using Bayesian priors for more flexible latent class analysis. In Joint statistical proceedings, government statistics section (pp. 4979–4993). American Statistical Association.
   Google Scholar
• Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. (2015). Residual associations in latent class and latent transition analysis. Structural Equation Modeling, 22, 169–177. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2014.935844
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. (2016). General random effect latent variable modeling: Random subjects, items, contexts, and parameters. In J. R. Harring, L. M. Stapleton, & S. N. Beretvas (Eds.), Advances in multilevel modeling for educational research: Addressing practical issues found in real-world applications (pp. 163–192). Information Age.
   Google Scholar
• Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. (2019). Latent variable centering of predictors and mediators in multilevel and time-series models. Structural Equation Modeling, 26, 119–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2018.1511375
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. (2020). Comparison of models for the analysis of intensive longitudinal data. Structural Equation Modeling 27, 275–297. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2019.1626733
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. (2021). Advances in Bayesian model fit evaluation for structural equation models. Structural Equation Modeling, 28, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2020.1764360
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asparouhov, T., Muthén, B., & Morin, A. J. S. (2015). Bayesian structural equation modeling with cross-loadings and residual Covariances: Comments on Stromeyer. Journal of Management, 41, 1561–1577. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206315591075
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bollen, K. A., & Brand, J. E. (2010). A general panel model with random and fixed effects: A structural equations approach. Social Forces, 89, 1–34.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Box, G. E. P., & Jenkins, J. M. (1976). Time series analysis: Forecasting and control. Holden-Day.
   Google Scholar
• Cole, D. A., Martin, N. C., & Steiger, J. H. (2005). Empirical and conceptual problems with longitudinal trait-state models: Introducing a trait-state-occasion model. Psychological Methods, 10, 3–20.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Curran, P. J., Howard, A. L., Bainter, S. A., Lane, S. T., & McGinley, J. S. (2014). The separation of between-person and within-person components of individual change over time: A latent curve model with structured residuals. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 82, 879–894.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Du Toit, S. H. C., & Browne, M. W. (2001). The covariance structure of a vector ARMA time series. In R. Cudeck, S. Du Toit, & D Sörbom (Eds), Structural equation modeling: Present and future (pp. 279–314). Scientific Software International.
   Google Scholar
• Granger, C. W. J., & Morris, M. J. (1976). Time series modelling and interpretation. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A, 139, 246–257. https://doi.org/10.2307/2345178
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamaker, E. L. (2018). How to run the RI-CLPM with Mplus. https://www.statmodel.com/download/RI-CLPM%20Hamaker%20input.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Hamaker, E. L., Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. (2021). Dynamic structural equation modeling as a combination of time series modeling, multilevel modeling, and structural equation modeling. To be published as Chapter. 31 In R H. Hoyle (Ed.), The handbook of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hamaker, E. L., Kuiper, R. M., & Grasman, R. P. (2015). A critique of the cross-lagged panel model. Psychological Methods, 20, 102–116. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038889
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joreskog, K. G. (1978). Structural analysis of covariance and correlation matrices. Psychometrika, 43, 443–477.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kenny, D. A., & Zautra, A. (1995). The trait–state– error model for multiwave data. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 63, 52–59.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maydeu-Olivares, A., & Joe, H. (2006). Limited information goodness-offit testing in multidimensional contingency tables. Psychometrika, 71, 713–732. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-005-1295-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mulder, J. D., & Hamaker, E. L. (2021). Three extensions of the random intercept cross-lagged panel model. Structural Equation Modeling, 28, 638–648. https://jeroendmulder.github.io/RI-CLPM/ https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2020.1784738
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muthén, B. O. (1993). Goodness of fit test with categorical and other nonnormal variables. In K. A. Bollen and J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 205–234). SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Muthén, B. O., & Asparouhov, T. (2002). Latent variable analysis with categorical outcomes: Multiple-group and growth modeling in Mplus. Mplus Web Note No.4. http://www.statmodel.com/download/webnotes/CatMGLong.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Muthén, B., & Asparouhov, T. (2012). Bayesian structural equation modeling: A more flexible representation of substantive theory. Psychological Methods, 17, 313–335. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026802
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998–2017). Mplus User’s Guide, Eighth Edition. Muthén & Muthén.
   Google Scholar
• Orth, U., Clark, D. A., Donnellan, M. B., & Robins, R. W. (2021). Testing prospective effects in longitudinal research: Comparing seven competing cross-lagged models. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 120, 1013–1034.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sörbom, D. (1989). Model modification. Psychometrika, 54, 371–384. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02294623
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Usami, S., Murayama, K., & Hamaker, E. L. (2019). A unified framework of longitudinal models to examine reciprocal relations. Psychological Methods, 24, 637–657.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Usami, S. (2021). On the differences between general cross-lagged panel model and random-intercept cross-lagged panel model: Interpretation of cross-lagged parameters and model choice. Structural Equation Modeling, 28, 331–344. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2020.1821690
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Iddekinge, C. H., Ferris, G. R., Perrewe, P. L., Perryman, A. A., Blass, F. R., & Heetderks, T. D. (2009). Effects of selection and training on unit-level performance over time: A latent growth modeling approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 829–843. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014453
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zyphur, M. J., Allison, P. D., Tay, L., Voelkle, M. C., Preacher, K. J., Zhang, Z., Hamaker, E. L., Shamsollahi, A., Pierides, D. C., Koval, P., Diener, E. (2020). From data to causes I: Building A general cross-lagged panel model (GCLM). Organizational Research Methods, 23, 651–687. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428119847278
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zyphur, M. J., Voelkle, M. C., Tay, L., Allison, P. D., Preacher, K. J., Zhang, Z., Hamaker, E. L., Shamsollahi, A., Pierides, D. C., Koval, P., Diener, E. (2020). From data to causes II: Comparing approaches to panel data analysis. Organizational Research Methods, 23, 688–716. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428119847280
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar