DEVELOPMENTAL TRAJECTORY GROUPS: FACT OR A USEFUL STATISTICAL FICTION?*

By Dan Nagin, Richard E. Tremblay. 2005

419 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Clinical Psychology, Education, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/493825efc8bd1adb217503f9c73e95f5da7cbeda

How researchers see this paper

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

In Clinical Psychology

1. J. McGloin
2. Christopher J. Sullivan
3. R. Sampson
4. Alex R. Piquero
5. J. Laub
6. Alexandre J. S. Morin
7. Michael Caudy
8. Daniel J. Bauer

In Education

1. J. Laub
2. Alex R. Piquero
3. R. Sampson
4. Alexandre J. S. Morin
5. Daniel J. Bauer
6. Francesco C. Billari
7. J. McGloin
8. Nicola Barban

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

1. Alexandre J. S. Morin
2. J. Laub
3. Alex R. Piquero
4. R. Sampson
5. Daniel J. Bauer
6. Francesco C. Billari
7. J. McGloin
8. Nicola Barban

Citations in the corpus

• Impact of Misspecifications of the Latent Variance–Covariance and Residual Matrices on the Class Enumeration Accuracy of Growth Mixture Models (2016, background): “There has been a long-standing debate in the literature regarding the relative superiority of each possible approach (e.g., Nagin, 2010; Nagin & Tremblay, 2005; Sampson & Laub, 2005; for a review, see Morin et al., 2011).”
• Detecting Specialization in Offending: Comparing Analytic Approaches (2009, background): “Second, because latent classes are derived on the basis of a modeling approach and probabilistic assignment process, it is important that they are not interpreted too literally ( Nagin and Tremblay 2005; Osgood 2005).”
• General Growth Mixture Analysis with Antecedents and Consequences of Change (2010, neutral): “…and spirited ontological discussions about the nature of the emergent trajectory groups resulting from the analyses (Bauer & Curran, 2003, 2004; Nagin & Tremblay, 2005; Sampson, Laub, & Eggleston, 2004; Sampson & Laub, 2005), i.e., whether the resultant trajectory typology defined by the…”
• Taking Stock of Developmental Trajectories of Criminal Activity over the Life Course (2008, methodology): “For a slightly different view/interpretation of this, see Nagin and Tremblay (2005a).”
• Observations on the Use of Growth Mixture Models in Psychological Research (2007, background): “For instance, by focusing on expectations in a conventional growth model, one might fail to appreciate more extreme or infrequent trajectories that could be revealed by a GMM (Collins, 2006; Nagin & Tremblay, 2005).”
• The potential of growth mixture modelling (2006, neutral): “Nagin's writings show reservations about the virtues of GMM (see Nagin, 2005; Nagin & Tremblay, 2005) and some of this is reflected in the current paper.”
• Classifying life course trajectories: a comparison of latent class and sequence analysis (2012, methodology): “Using either LCA or SA techniques, individuals are assigned to homogeneous classes that are interpreted as representing typical behaviours (Roeder et al., 1999; McVicar and Anyadike-Danes, 2002; Macmillan and Eliason, 2003; Nagin and Tremblay, 2005; Aassve et al., 2007; Amato et al., 2008).”
• SEDUCTIONS OF METHOD: REJOINDER TO NAGIN AND TREMBLAY'S "DEVELOPMENTAL TRAJECTORY GROUPS: FACT OR FICTION?" (2005, methodology): “This repeats a basic principle of statistics.6 Fifth, we learn that different definitions of desistance (the outcome) lead to different offenders being identified as desisters (Nagin and Tremblay, 2005: 896–897 and Figure 6).”