Dataset Information

A comparison of four approaches to account for method effects in latent state-trait analyses.

ABSTRACT: Latent state-trait (LST) analysis is frequently applied in psychological research to determine the degree to which observed scores reflect stable person-specific effects, effects of situations and/or person-situation interactions, and random measurement error. Most LST applications use multiple repeatedly measured observed variables as indicators of latent trait and latent state residual factors. In practice, such indicators often show shared indicator-specific (or method) variance over time. In this article, the authors compare 4 approaches to account for such method effects in LST models and discuss the strengths and weaknesses of each approach based on theoretical considerations, simulations, and applications to actual data sets. The simulation study revealed that the LST model with indicator-specific traits (Eid, 1996) and the LST model with M - 1 correlated method factors (Eid, Schneider, & Schwenkmezger, 1999) performed well, whereas the model with M orthogonal method factors used in the early work of Steyer, Ferring, and Schmitt (1992) and the correlated uniqueness approach (Kenny, 1976) showed limitations under conditions of either low or high method-specificity. Recommendations for the choice of an appropriate model are provided.

SUBMITTER: Geiser C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3368086 | biostudies-literature | 2012 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A comparison of four approaches to account for method effects in latent state-trait analyses.

Geiser Christian C Lockhart Ginger G

Psychological methods 20120206 2

Latent state-trait (LST) analysis is frequently applied in psychological research to determine the degree to which observed scores reflect stable person-specific effects, effects of situations and/or person-situation interactions, and random measurement error. Most LST applications use multiple repeatedly measured observed variables as indicators of latent trait and latent state residual factors. In practice, such indicators often show shared indicator-specific (or method) variance over time. In ...[more]

PMID: 22309958

Similar Datasets

Project description:Several different procedures have been described for surgical treatment of rectal prolapse and consensus on the optimal approach has not been reached. The Swedish Rectal Prolapse Trial was performed with the aim to compare the outcomes after the most common surgical approaches to rectal prolapse. A multicentre randomized trial was conducted from 2000 to 2009. Patients were randomized between a perineal or an abdominal approach for correction of rectal prolapse (randomization A) if eligible for any procedures. Patients considered unsuitable for random allocation were only included in randomizations B or C. Patients in randomization B (perineal group) were randomized to Delorme's or Altemeier's procedures and those in randomization C (abdominal group) to suture rectopexy or resection rectopexy. Primary outcomes were bowel function and quality of life, measured using Wexner incontinence score and RAND-36, and secondary outcomes were complications and recurrence at 3 years. During the study period, 134 patients were randomized: 18 in randomization A group, 80 in randomization B group and 54 in randomization C group; of these, 122 patients underwent surgery. Mean follow-up was 2.6 years. Improvements in Wexner and RAND-36 scores were seen but with no significant difference between the groups. Health change scores were significantly improved from baseline up to 1 year after surgery (P < 0.001). At 3 years, recurrence rates were two of seven patients for abdominal versus five of eight patients for perineal approach (P = 0.315), 18 of 31 patients (58 per cent) for Delorme's versus 15 of 30 patients (50 per cent) for Altemeier's (P = 0.611) and four of 19 patients (21 per cent) for suture rectopexy versus two of 21 patients (10 per cent) for resection rectopexy (P = 0.398). There were no significant differences regarding postoperative complications. For all procedures, significant improvements from baseline in health change scores were noted after surgery. Recurrence rates were higher than previously reported. Registration number: NCT04893642 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Dataset Information

A comparison of four approaches to account for method effects in latent state-trait analyses.

Publications

A comparison of four approaches to account for method effects in latent state-trait analyses.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets