Interpreting effect sizes when controlling for stability effects in longitudinal autoregressive models: Implications for psychological science

By Paul J. C. Adachi, Teena Willoughby. 2015

435 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Applied Psychology, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Health

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/8e43bb4d7bb79ce1da440aeb1688f7fab2435b36

How researchers see this paper

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

In Applied Psychology

1. M. Pinquart
2. Oana Negru‐Subtirica
3. E. I. Pop
4. E. Crocetti
5. T. Lesener
6. B. Gusy
7. Teena Willoughby
8. Jeroen S. Lemmens

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

1. M. Pinquart
2. Oana Negru‐Subtirica
3. E. I. Pop
4. E. Crocetti
5. Teena Willoughby
6. W. V. D. Schuur
7. Susanne E. Baumgartner
8. Maike Luhmann

In Health

1. M. Pinquart
2. Oana Negru‐Subtirica
3. E. I. Pop
4. E. Crocetti
5. Maike Luhmann
6. Olga Stavrova
7. Teena Willoughby
8. Marie Good

Citations in the corpus

• Social connectedness as a source and consequence of meaning in life (2016, background): “Given the moderate stability (approx. r = .30), a small longitudinal effect size can be considered meaningful (Adachi & Willoughby, 2014).”
• Developmental trajectories and reciprocal associations between career adaptability and vocational identity: A three-wave longitudinal study with adolescents (2015, positive): “Though they depict small effects, these effects are meaningful when predicting change (Adachi & Willoughby, 2015) in longitudinal autoregressive models, because: (a) we had high bivariate correlations between variables from T1 to T3 and (b) we controlled for stability effects (i.e., previous scores…”
• The Relationship Between Media Multitasking and Attention Problems in Adolescents: Results of Two Longitudinal Studies (2017, background): “However, according to Adachi and Willoughby (2015), in longitudinal models that take into account autoregressive effects (i.e., previous levels of a variable), even very small effects may be meaningful.”
• Associations of Parenting Dimensions and Styles with Internalizing Symptoms in Children and Adolescents: A Meta-Analysis (2017, background): “…than in cross-sectional studies as changes in the predictor variable over time lead to a reduction of predictive power of the initial level of this variable and as concurrent correlations are often based on bidirectional effects of the two assessed variables (Adachi & Willoughby, 2015).”
• The job demands-resources model: A meta-analytic review of longitudinal studies (2018, result): “Adachi and Willoughby (2015) point out that effect sizes in longitudinal studies are often much smaller compared to cross-sectional studies.”
• The Longitudinal Association Between Social-Media Use and Depressive Symptoms Among Adolescents and Young Adults: An Empirical Reply to Twenge et al. (2018) (2019, background): “…are to be expected among longitudinal models, given that they control for previous scores (within variables), covariates, and correlations among variables within each wave (Adachi & Willoughby, 2015), in this body of literature, the magnitude of even cross-sectional associations are small.”
• Social Media Use and Adolescents’ Well-Being: Developing a Typology of Person-Specific Effect Patterns (2020, neutral): “Following the guidelines of Adachi and Willoughby (2015) for interpreting effects in longitudinal autoregressive models, we considered an effect size of β = .05 as the smallest effect size of interest (SESOI; Lakens et al., 2018).”