How Well Can Two-Wave Models Recover the Three-Wave Second Order Latent Model Parameters?
Files
TR Number
Date
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
Although previous studies on structural equation modeling (SEM) have indicated that the second-order latent growth model (SOLGM) is a more appropriate approach to longitudinal intervention effects, its application still requires researchers to collect at least three-wave data (e.g. randomized pretest, posttest, and follow-up design). However, in some circumstances, researchers can only collect two-wave data for resource limitations. With only two-wave data, the SOLGM can not be identified and researchers often choose alternative SEM models to fit two-wave data. Recent studies show that the two-wave longitudinal common factor model (2W-LCFM) and latent change score model (2W-LCSM) can perform well for comparing latent change between groups. However, there still lacks empirical evidence about how accurately these two-wave models can estimate the group effects of latent change obtained by three-wave SOLGM (3W-SOLGM). The main purpose of this dissertation, therefore, is trying to examine to what extent the fixed effects of the tree-wave SOLGM can be recovered from the parameter estimates of the two-wave LCFM and LCSM given different simulation conditions.
Fundamentally, the supplementary study (study 2) using three-wave LCFM was established to help justify the logistics of different model comparisons in our main study (study 1). The data generating model in both studies is 3W-SOLGM and there are in total 5 simulation factors (sample size, group differences in intercept and slope, the covariance between the slope and intercept, size of time-specific residual, change the pattern of time-specific residual). Three main types of evaluation indices were used to assess the quality of estimation (bias/relative bias, standard error, and power/type I error rate). The results in the supplementary study show that the performance of 3W-LCFM and 3W-LCSM are equivalent, which further justifies the different models' comparison in the main study. The point estimates for the fixed effect parameters obtained from the two-wave models are unbiased or identical to the ones from the three-wave model. However, using two-wave models could reduce the estimation precision and statistical power when the time-specific residual variance is large and changing pattern is heteroscedastic (non-constant). Finally, two real datasets were used to illustrate the simulation results.