Definition
Longitudinal structural equation models (LSEMs) are statistical models that allow separating measurement error from true individual differences related to variability and/or change processes.
Description
Overview: Models for Measuring Variability Versus Change
In the context of LSEMs, it is common to distinguish between models for analyzing variability and models for analyzing change (Eid, 2007). Variability refers to short-term fluctuations around a fixed set point that are usually reversible (e.g., mood states, anger, hormone levels), whereas change is typically more long-lasting and often irreversible (e.g., developmental processes like physical growth or decline in fluid intelligence across adulthood). The most prominent LSEM approaches for modeling variability are based on latent state-trait (LST) theory (Steyer, Ferring, & Schmitt, 1992; Steyer, Schmitt, & Eid, 1999). Common LSEM approaches for modeling change are autoregressive (AR) models (Jöreskog, 1979), latent...
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Anastasi, A. (1983). Traits, states, and situations: A comprehensive view. In H. Wainer & S. Messick (Eds.), Principals of modern psychological measurement (pp. 345–356). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bollen, K. A., & Curran, P. J. (2004). Autoregressive latent trajectory (ALT) models: A synthesis of two traditions. Sociological Methods & Research, 32, 336–383.
Bollen, K. A., & Curran, P. J. (2006). Latent curve models: A structural equation perspective. New York: Wiley.
Cole, D. A., Martin, N. M., & Steiger, J. H. (2005). Empirical and conceptual problems with longitudinal trait-state models: Introducing a trait-state-occasion model. Psychological Methods, 10, 3–20.
Eid, M. (2007). Latent class models for analyzing variability and change. In A. Ong & M. van Dulmen (Eds.), Handbook of methods in positive psychology (pp. 591–607). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Eid, M., Courvoisier, D. S., & Lischetzke, T. (2012). Structural equation modeling of ambulatory assessment data. In M. R. Mehl & T. S. Connor (Eds.), Handbook of research methods for studying daily life (pp. 384–406). New York: Guilford.
Eid, M., & Hoffmann, L. (1998). Measuring variability and change with an item response model for polytomous variables. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 23, 193–215.
Geiser, C., Eid, M., Nussbeck, F. W., Courvoisier, D. S., & Cole, D. A. (2010). Analyzing true change in longitudinal multitrait-multimethod studies: Application of a multimethod change model to depression and anxiety in children. Developmental Psychology, 46, 29–45.
Geiser, C., Keller, B., & Lockhart, G. (in press). First versus second order latent growth curve models: Some insights from latent state-trait theory. Structural Equation Modeling.
Geiser, C., & Lockhart, G. (2012). A comparison of four approaches to account for method effects in latent state trait analyses. Psychological Methods, 17, 255–283.
Hertzog, C., & Nesselroade, J. R. (1987). Beyond autoregressive models: Some implications of the trait-state distinction for the structural modeling of developmental change. Child Development, 58, 93–109.
Jöreskog, K. G. (1979). Statistical models and methods for analysis of longitudinal data. In K. G. Jöreskog & D. Sörbom (Eds.), Advances in factor analysis and structural equation models (pp. 129–169). Cambridge, MA: Abt.
McArdle, J. J. (1998). Dynamic but structural equation modeling of repeated measures data. In J. Nesselroade & R. Cattell (Eds.), Handbook of Maltirariate Experimental Psychology (pp. 561–614). New york, NY: Plenum Press.
McArdle, J. J., & Hamagami, F. (2001). Latent difference score structural models for linear dynamic analysis with incomplete longitudinal data. In L. M. Collins & A. G. Sayer (Eds.), New methods for the analysis of change (pp. 137–175). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Meredith, W., & Tisak, J. (1990). Latent curve analysis. Psychometrika, 55, 107–122.
Novick, M. R. (1966). The axioms and principal results of classical test theory. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 3, 1–18.
Sayer, A. G., & Cumsille, P. E. (2001). Second-order latent growth models. In L. M. Collins & A. G. Sayer (Eds.), New methods for the analysis of change (pp. 177–200). Washington, DC: APA.
Sörbom, D. (1975). Detection of correlated errors in longitudinal data. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 28, 138–151.
Steyer, R., Ferring, D., & Schmitt, M. J. (1992). States and traits in psychological assessment. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 8, 79–98.
Steyer, R., Eid, M., & Schwenkmezger, P. (1997). Modeling true intraindividual change: True change as a latent variable. Methods of Psychological Research-Online, 2, 21–33.
Steyer, R., Geiser, C., & Fiege, C. (2012). Latent state-trait models. In H. Cooper (Ed.), Handbook of research methods in psychology (pp. 291–308). Washington, DC: APA.
Steyer, R., Krambeer, S., & Hannöver, W. (2004). Modeling latent trait-change. In K. Van Montfort, H. Oud, & A. Satorra (Eds.), Recent developments on structural equation modeling: Theory and applications (pp. 337–357). Amsterdam: Kluwer Academic Press.
Steyer, R., Partchev, I., & Shanahan, M. (2000). Modeling true intra-individual change in structural equation models: The case of poverty and children’s psychosocial adjustment. In T. D. Little, K. U. Schnabel, & J. Baumert (Eds.), Modeling longitudinal and multiple-group data: Practical issues, applied approaches, and specific examples (pp. 109–126). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Steyer, R., Schmitt, M., & Eid, M. (1999). Latent state-trait theory and research in personality and individual differences. European Journal of Personality, 13, 389–408.
Tisak, J., & Tisak, M. S. (2000). Permanency and ephemerality of psychological measures with application to organizational commitment. Psychological Methods, 5, 175–198.
Widaman, K. F., & Reise, S. P. (1997). Exploring the measurement invariance of psychological instruments: Applications in the substance use domain. In K. J. Bryant, M. Windle, & S. G. West (Eds.), The science of prevention: Methodological advances from alcohol and substance abuse research (pp. 281–324). Washington, DC: APA.
Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank Brian Keller for creating the figures and Ginger Lockhart for helpful comments on the draft.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this entry
Cite this entry
Geiser, C. (2014). Longitudinal Structural Equation Modeling. In: Michalos, A.C. (eds) Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_1701
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_1701
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-0752-8
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-0753-5
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and Law