Dyadic Data Analysis

By D. Annis. 2007

3,533 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Artificial Intelligence, Food Science, Geometry and Topology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e34890a59b2cdeaf04e8017b5268cdf0c4889ea7

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 Food Science

In Geometry and Topology

Citations in the corpus

Compared With What? The Effects of Different Comparisons on Conceptual Knowledge and Procedural Flexibility for Equation Solving (2009, methodology): “We specified the use of restricted maximum likelihood (REML) estimation and compound symmetry for the variance-covariance structure in the models (Kenny et al., 2006).”
Distress in couples coping with cancer: a meta-analysis and critical review of role and gender effects. (2008, background): “Kenny and his associates (e.g., Cook & Kenny, 2005; Kashy & Kenny, 2000; Kenny & Cook, 1999; Kenny, Kashy, & Cook, 2006) have proposed a model of dyadic data analysis, the actor–partner interdependence model (APIM), which uses the dyad as the unit of analysis while also allowing for gender…”
Walking in each other's Shoes: Perspective Taking Mediates Effects of Emotional Intelligence on Relationship Quality (2011, methodology): “To investigate the effects of emotional intelligence on relationship quality, data were analysed using structural equation modelling according to the Actor-Partner Interdependence Model (APIM; Kenny, 1996; Kenny et al., 2006; Vollmann, Antoniw, Hartung, & Renner, 2011).”
Perceived empathy, accurate empathy and relationship satisfaction in heterosexual couples (2010, methodology): “Although the cut off for what is considered an adequately reliable measure may vary, Nunnally (1978) has suggested a minimum level of .”
The role of relational uncertainty in depressive symptoms and relationship quality (2010, background): “Path analysis was advantageous because (i) it accommodates observations that are not independent, (ii) it documents actor and partner effects in a straightforward fashion, and (iii) it offers a parsimonious method of evaluating mediation (Kenny et al., 2006).”
Multiple-Group Analysis for Structural Equation Modeling With Dependent Samples (2015, methodology): “Methods that are widely used to analyze dependent samples in social and behavioral research can be found in Kenny, Kashy, and Cook (2006).”
Perceived, not actual, similarity predicts initial attraction in a live romantic context: Evidence from the speed-dating paradigm (2013, methodology): “We also analyzed these data using the social relations model (SRM; Kenny, 1994; Kenny et al., 2006).”
I feel, therefore you act: Intrapersonal and interpersonal effects of emotion on negotiation as a function of social power (2010, methodology): “relatively inflexible in the specific tests that can be run (Kenny et al., 2006).”
Comment (2015, methodology): “…analysis and has received increasing attention in the conventional regression framework (e.g., the actor-partner interdependence model, the multilevel p 2 model; for an overview, see Card, Selig, and Little [2011]; Kenny, Kashy, and Cook [2006]), it has been less developed in sequence analysis.”
An actor—partner interdependence model of relational turbulence: Cognitions and emotions (2010, methodology): “We employ an actor–partner interdependence model (Cook & Kenny, 2005; Kenny, Kashy, & Cook, 2006) to address recent calls for theorizing about the interplay within dyads (Cook & Snyder, 2005; Kenny et al., 2006).”