Detecting Mixtures From Structural Model Differences Using Latent Variable Mixture Modeling: A Comparison of Relative Model Fit Statistics

By James M. Henson, S. Reise, Kevin Kim. 2007

466 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Artificial Intelligence, Management Science and Operations Research, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/bc528da225543fa613045707338a6c0b2da1e9eb

How researchers see this paper

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

In Artificial Intelligence

In Management Science and Operations Research

In Statistics and Probability

Citations in the corpus

Classical Latent Profile Analysis of Academic Self-Concept Dimensions: Synergy of Person- and Variable-Centered Approaches to Theoretical Models of Self-Concept (2009, unknown): “…and Rubin (2001) and its alternative based on BLRT (McLachlan & Peel, 2000) and information criterion indexes— the Baysian Information Criterion (BIC) and Akaike's Information Criterion (e.g., Collins et al., 1993; Henson et al., 2007; Magidson & Vermunt, 2004), or the SSA-BIC (Yang, 2006).”
Do Overwhelmed Expatriates Intend to Leave? The Effects of Sensory Processing Sensitivity, Stress, and Social Capital on Expatriates' Turnover Intention (2018, methodology): “(LMR; 2001) log-likelihood ratio test (LRT) as well as information criterion indexes, namely the Bayesian information criterion (BIC) and Akaike’s information criterion (e.g., Collins et al., 1993; Henson et al., 2007).”
Disentangling Shape from Level Effects in Person-Centered Analyses: An Illustration Based on University Teachers’ Multidimensional Profiles of Effectiveness (2015, methodology): “…tests and classification accuracy (i.e., entropy) should not be used to select the optimal number of latent classes present in the data (e.g., Henson et al., 2007; Tofighi & Enders, 2008), investigations of their efficacy in contrasting alternative models including the same number of latent…”
Using Group-Based Trajectory and Growth Mixture Modeling to Identify Classes of Change Trajectories (2016, background): “A number of simulation studies have found that LGMM analyses are likely underpowered for all but the largest data sets (e.g., N > 500), particularly due to increasing model complexity when covariates are included in the models (Hensen et al., 2007; Tofighi & Enders, 2006).”
Multiple-Group Analysis of Similarity in Latent Profile Solutions (2016, background): “…1999), (b) the continuous latent factors that are included in factor mixture models (Morin & Marsh, 2015; Morin, Morizot, et al., 2011), or (c) the within-profile regression parameters that are also estimated as part of mixture regression models (e.g., Henson et al., 2007; Morin et al., 2015).”
Model selection and psychological theory: A discussion of the differences between the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) and the Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) (2012, methodology): “Henson et al. (2007) evaluated the AIC and BIC with factor mixture models and continuous observed variables.”
Discovering Unobserved Heterogeneity in Structural Equation Models to Avert Validity Threats (2013, background): “Several applications and simulation studies (e.g., Arminger et al. 1999; Henson et al. 2007; Jedidi et al. 1997; Tueller and Lubke 2010) illustrate the usefulness of finite mixture models by showing how structural relationships among factors differ across unobserved groups.”
Stability, change, and implications of students’ motivation profiles: A latent transition analysis (2017, methodology): “Simulation studies indicate that four of these indicators (CAIC, BIC, ABIC, and BLRT) are particularly effective (Henson, Reise, & Kim, 2007; Nylund, Asparouhov, &Muthén, 2007; Peugh & Fan, 2013; Tein, Coxe, & Cham, 2013; Tofighi & Enders, 2008; Yang, 2006), while the AIC and LMR/ALMR should not be ”
Practitioner’s Guide to Latent Class Analysis: Methodological Considerations and Common Pitfalls. (2020, methodology): “Sample size Power sample to: 1) Determine the true number of classes 2) Detect pertinent differences between the classes When n < 300, it is recommended to perform Monte Carlo simulation to determine adequacy of sample size (38) Standard power calculations should be performed to determine the sample”