A Comparison of Different Approaches for Estimating Cross-Lagged Effects from a Causal Inference Perspective

被引:100
作者
Luedtke, Oliver [1 ,2 ]
Robitzsch, Alexander [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] IPN Leibniz Inst Sci & Math Educ, Olshausenstr 62, D-24118 Kiel, Germany
[2] Ctr Int Student Assessment, Munich, Germany
关键词
Causal inference; cross-lagged effect; cross-lagged panel model; longitudinal data; random intercept cross-lagged panel model; ACADEMIC SELF-CONCEPT; WITHIN-PERSON; TEST-SCORES; MODELS; RELIABILITY; LIKELIHOOD; GRADES;
D O I
10.1080/10705511.2022.2065278
中图分类号
O1 [数学];
学科分类号
0701 ; 070101 ;
摘要
This article compares different approaches for estimating cross-lagged effects with a cross-lagged panel design under a causal inference perspective. We distinguish between models that rely on no unmeasured confounding (i.e., observed covariates are sufficient to remove confounding) and latent variable-type models (e.g., random intercept cross-lagged panel model) that use parametric assumptions to adjust for unmeasured time-invariant confounding by including additional latent variables. Simulation studies confirm that the cross-lagged panel model provides biased estimates of the cross-lagged effect in the presence of unmeasured confounding. However, the simulations also show that the latent variable-type approaches strongly depend on the specific parametric assumptions, and produce biased estimates under different data-generating scenarios. Finally, we discuss the role of the longitudinal design and the limitations of assessing model fit for estimating cross-lagged effects.
引用
收藏
页码:888 / 907
页数:20
相关论文
共 78 条
[1]  
Allison PD., 2017, Socius, V3, P1, DOI [DOI 10.1177/2378023117710578, 10.1177/2378023117710578]
[2]   Equivalent Approaches to Dealing With Unobserved Heterogeneity in Cross-Lagged Panel Models? Investigating the Benefits and Drawbacks of the Latent Curve Model With Structured Residuals and the Random Intercept Cross-Lagged Panel Model [J].
Andersen, Henrik Kenneth .
PSYCHOLOGICAL METHODS, 2022, 27 (05) :730-751
[3]  
Angrist JD, 2009, MOSTLY HARMLESS ECONOMETRICS: AN EMPIRICISTS COMPANION, P3
[4]  
Aronow P.M., 2019, Foundations of Agnostic Statistics, DOI [DOI 10.1017/9781316831762, 10.1017/9781316831762]
[5]  
Asendorpf J B., 2021, The handbook of personality dynamics and processes, P815, DOI [10.1016/B978-0-12-813995-0.00031-5, DOI 10.1016/B978-0-12-813995-0.00031-5]
[6]  
Asparouhov T., RESIDUAL STRUCTURAL
[7]   Machine Learning Methods That Economists Should Know About [J].
Athey, Susan ;
Imbens, Guido W. .
ANNUAL REVIEW OF ECONOMICS, VOL 11, 2019, 2019, 11 :685-725
[8]   A Measure of Robustness to Misspecification [J].
Athey, Susan ;
Imbens, Guido .
AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, 2015, 105 (05) :476-480
[9]   THEORY AND METHODS OF PANEL DATA MODELS WITH INTERACTIVE EFFECTS [J].
Bai, Jushan ;
Li, Kunpeng .
ANNALS OF STATISTICS, 2014, 42 (01) :142-170
[10]   Reciprocal Effects of Reading and Mathematics? Beyond the Cross-Lagged Panel Model [J].
Bailey, Drew H. ;
Oh, Yoonkyung ;
Farkas, George ;
Morgan, Paul ;
Hillemeier, Marianne .
DEVELOPMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2020, 56 (05) :912-921