↓ Skip to main content

A longitudinal multilevel CFA-MTMM model for interchangeable and structurally different methods

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, April 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A longitudinal multilevel CFA-MTMM model for interchangeable and structurally different methods
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, April 2014
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00311
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tobias Koch, Martin Schultze, Michael Eid, Christian Geiser

Abstract

One of the key interests in the social sciences is the investigation of change and stability of a given attribute. Although numerous models have been proposed in the past for analyzing longitudinal data including multilevel and/or latent variable modeling approaches, only few modeling approaches have been developed for studying the construct validity in longitudinal multitrait-multimethod (MTMM) measurement designs. The aim of the present study was to extend the spectrum of current longitudinal modeling approaches for MTMM analysis. Specifically, a new longitudinal multilevel CFA-MTMM model for measurement designs with structurally different and interchangeable methods (called Latent-State-Combination-Of-Methods model, LS-COM) is presented. Interchangeable methods are methods that are randomly sampled from a set of equivalent methods (e.g., multiple student ratings for teaching quality), whereas structurally different methods are methods that cannot be easily replaced by one another (e.g., teacher, self-ratings, principle ratings). Results of a simulation study indicate that the parameters and standard errors in the LS-COM model are well recovered even in conditions with only five observations per estimated model parameter. The advantages and limitations of the LS-COM model relative to other longitudinal MTMM modeling approaches are discussed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 47 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 19%
Researcher 7 15%
Student > Master 5 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Other 9 19%
Unknown 10 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 19 40%
Mathematics 4 9%
Social Sciences 3 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 4%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 12 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 April 2014.
All research outputs
#20,228,193
of 22,753,345 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#23,950
of 29,650 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,486
of 226,127 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#269
of 310 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,753,345 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,650 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 226,127 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 310 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.