
doi: 10.1002/cad.20401
pmid: 33724678
Developmental researchers often have research questions about cross-lag effects-the effect of one variable predicting a second variable at a subsequent time point. The cross-lag panel model (CLPM) is often fit to longitudinal panel data to examine cross-lag effects; however, its utility has recently been called into question because of its inability to distinguish between-person effects from within-person effects. This has led to alternative forms of the CLPM to be proposed to address these limitations, including the random-intercept CLPM and the latent curve model with structured residuals. We describe these models focusing on the interpretation of their model parameters, and apply them to examine cross-lag associations between reading and mathematics. The results from the various models suggest reading and mathematics are reciprocally related; however, the strength of these lagged associations was model dependent. We highlight the strengths and limitations of each approach and make recommendations regarding modeling choice.
Models, Statistical, Reading, Humans, Longitudinal Studies
Models, Statistical, Reading, Humans, Longitudinal Studies
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 45 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% |
