An Introduction to Latent Growth Models for Developmental Data Analysis

By T. Little, Kai U. Schnabel, J. Baumert. 2000

125 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Management Science and Operations Research

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/046d88e639607d5d8dde423d5e4fa002378c3751

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Management Science and Operations Research

Citations in the corpus

Trajectories of Pure and Co-Occurring Internalizing and Externalizing Problems from Age 2 to Age 12: Findings from the NICHD Study of Early Child Care (2007, unknown): “This type of growth model uses a polynomial function to model the relationship between the behavior under investigation and age (McArdle & Bell, 2000; Muthén, 2001; Singer & Willett, 2003).”
Modeling cognitive and metacognitive strategies and their relationships to EFL reading test performance (2006, background): “The SEM approach thus allows researchers to focus on the construct validation of theoretical propositions (McArdele & Bell, 2000).”
The Biasing Effects of Unmodeled ARMA Time Series Processes on Latent Growth Curve Model Estimates (2005, background): “…different research hypotheses about the developmental trend than some other analytic techniques (e.g., repeated measures analysis of variance), many researchers have argued for its superiority (e.g., Curran, 2000; Duncan, Duncan, Strycker, Li, & Alpert, 1999; Fan, 2003; McArdle & Bell, 2000).”
Power of Latent Growth Modeling for Detecting Group Differences in Linear Growth Trajectory Parameters (2003, background): “For example, research in developmental trends shows that later measurements typically have larger variances than early measurements (for examples, see Fan, 2001, & McArdle & Bell, 2000).”
Emotional Experience Improves With Age: Evidence Based on Over 10 Years of Experience Sampling (2011, methodology): “Incomplete data and differential number of assessments per person were accommodated under the missing at random assumptions underlying accelerated longitudinal designs (McArdle & Bell, 2000).”
The Relation Between Self-Beliefs and Academic Achievement: A Meta-Analytic Review (2004, background): “Relatively little attention thus has been given to more recently developed procedures for analyzing longitudinal relations among variables, such as latent growth modeling (LGM; McArdle & Bell, 2000).”
Does a positive gain spiral of resources, efficacy beliefs and engagement exist? (2007, methodology): “According to Pitts et al. (1996) this accounts for the systematic (method) variance that is associated with each specific indicator (McArdle & Bell, 2000; Pitts et al., 1996).”
Flourishing students: A longitudinal study on positive emotions, personal resources, and study engagement (2011, background): “…not co-vary, in longitudinal measurement models, the measurement errors corresponding to the same indicator should be allowed to co-vary over time (McArdle & Bell, 2000; Pitts et al., 1996) in order to account for the systematic (method) variance that is associated with each specific indicator.”
Evaluating Latent Growth Curve Models Using Individual Fit Statistics (2006, unknown): “Although several authors (e.g., McArdle & Bell, 2000; McArdle & Hamagami, 1991, 6 COFFMAN AND MILLSAP ˆ yy ˆ y 1 1 ˆ ˆˆ ˆRML ln 2 ln (17) N yy i y yy i y i= N T y y π ˆln 2 ln yyT π 1ˆˆ ˆi y yy i y y y 1 1 ˆ ˆˆ ˆRML ln 2 ln (16) 2 i yy i y yy i yT π y y 2001; Mehta & West, 2000) have mentioned the…”