Deconstructing the construct: A network perspective on psychological phenomena

By Verena D. Schmittmann, A. Cramer, Lourens J. Waldorp, Sacha Epskamp, Rogier A. Kievit, Denny Borsboom. 2013

678 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Statistical and Nonlinear Physics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f1c17a5e51aaf46d6f69a45c2bc3629e0ddcd3e3

How researchers see this paper

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

In Cognitive Neuroscience

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

In Statistical and Nonlinear Physics

Citations in the corpus

State of the aRt personality research: A tutorial on network analysis of personality data in R (2015, positive): “Recently networks of relations among thoughts, feelings and behaviors have been proposed as models of personality and of psychopathology: in this framework, traits have been conceived of as emerging phenomena that arise from such networks (Borsboom & Cramer, 2013; Cramer et al., 2012a; Schmittmann e”
Generalized Network Psychometrics: Combining Network and Latent Variable Models (2016, positive): “causal effects, semantic overlap, or reciprocal interactions between putative indicators of a latent variable (Borsboom, 2008; Cramer et al., 2010; Borsboom et al., 2011; Cramer et al., 2012; Schmittmann et al., 2013).”
Qgraph: Network visualizations of relationships in psychometric data (2012, neutral): “…without the need for data reduction methods. qgraph was developed in the context of network approaches to psychometrics (Cramer et al. 2010; Borsboom 2008; Schmittmann et al. 2012), in which theoretical constructs in psychology are hypothesized to be networks of causally coupled variables.”
Modeling Affect Dynamics: State of the Art and Future Challenges (2015, background): “Recent applications of network analysis are based on multivariate time series techniques and consist of visualizing the autoregressive and cross-lagged relations between multiple variables (Bringmann et al., 2013; Schmittmann et al., 2011).”
A Psychometric Network Perspective on the Validity and Validation of Personality Trait Questionnaires (2019, background): “Thus, distinctions between what attributes constitute the extraversion domain become rather fuzzy and a matter of degree because of the overlap attributes can have with other domains (Schmittmann et al., 2013).”
Stability and variability of personality networks. A tutorial on recent developments in network psychometrics (2017, background): “Networks have been recently proposed as a model of complex psychological phenomena such as individual differences in psychopathology (Borsboom& Cramer, 2013; Schmittmann et al., 2013) and personality (Costantini, Epskamp, et al.”
Can network analysis transform psychopathology? (2016, positive): “…a radically different explanation for syndromic coherence (e.g., Borsboom & Cramer, 2013; Borsboom, 2008; Borsboom, Cramer, Schmittmann, Epskamp, & Waldorp, 2011; Borsboom, Epskamp, Kievit, Cramer, & Schmittmann, 2011; Cramer, Waldorp, van der Maas, & Borsboom, 2010a; Schmittmann et al., 2013).”
Unpacking Rumination and Executive Control: A Network Perspective (2017, methodology): “Network analyses were initiated in clinical psychology by Borsboom and colleagues (e.g., Borsboom, Cramer, Schmittmann, Epskamp, & Waldorp, 2011; Schmittmann et al., 2013) and have been increasingly applied to questions of psychopathology (e.”
Interpersonal Dynamics in Personality and Personality Disorders (2018, background): “While it is likely that the organization of traits can deviate from this nomothetic structure across people or in certain contexts and thus room remains for inductive research on this issue (e.g. Cramer et al., 2012; Schmittmann et al., 2013; Wood, Gardner, & Harms, 2015), general consensus about th”
Network analysis: an integrative approach to the structure of psychopathology. (2013, neutral): “The foundation of the network approach is simple (Cramer et al. 2010, Schmittmann et al. 2013): Instead of interpreting symptoms as a function of a set of underlying/latent disorders, the network approach conceptualizes symptoms as mutually interacting, often reciprocally reinforcing, elements of a…”
Mental Disorders as Causal Systems (2015, background): “There are two common ways to formulate the relation between indicators and constructs (Schmittmann et al., 2013).”
Understanding personality development (2018, background): “Strictly speaking, latent traits make some sense from a diagnostic/prediction perspective but less so from a theoretical/explanation perspective (as they do not reflect circumscribed conceptual entities or causal units of personality; also see Asendorpf, 2016; Franić, Borsboom, Dolan, & Boomsma, 201”
A Tutorial on Regularized Partial Correlation Networks (2016, background): “Recent years have seen increasing use of network modeling for exploratory studies of psychological behavior as an alternative to latent variable modeling (Borsboom and Cramer, 2013; Schmittmann et al., 2013).”
Depression is not a consistent syndrome: an investigation of unique symptom patterns in the STAR*D study (2014, background): “In such common cause models, symptoms are passive and interchangeable results of an underlying disorder, and diverse symptom profiles do not undermine the unity of the disorder (Schmittmann et al., 2013).”
Network analysis: a brief overview and tutorial (2018, background): “…between the variables constitute the psychological phenomenon (De Schryver, Vindevogel, Rasmussen, & Cramer, 2015), which is a system wherein the constituent variables mutually influence each other without the need to hypothesise the existence of causal latent variables (Schmittmann et al., 2013).”