Structural equation models for interchangeable dyads: Being the same makes a difference

Psychological Methods

Volumn 10, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 139-158

  Woody, Erik ^a   Sadler, Pamela ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WATERLOO   (Canada)

^b WILFRID LAURIER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Dyadic dependence; Dyadic interaction; Exchangeable dyads; Interpersonal interaction

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; HUMAN; HUMAN RELATION; METHODOLOGY; PERSONALITY; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; PSYCHOLOGY;

HUMANS; INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; PERSONALITY; PSYCHOLOGY;

EID: 22544476800     PISSN: 1082989X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/1082-989X.10.2.139     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Arbuckle, J. L., & Wothke, W. (1999). Amos 4.0 user's guide. Chicago: SmallWaters.
2. Bentler, P. M., & Wu, E. J. C. (1995). EQS for Windows user's guide. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software.
3. Berscheid, E., & Reis, H. T. (1998). Attraction and close relationships. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed., Vol. 2, pp. 193-281). New York: McGraw-Hill.
4. Bowen, J., & Huang, M. (1990). A comparison of maximum likelihood with method of moment procedures for separating individual and group effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 90-94.
5. Campbell, L., & Kashy, D. A. (2002). Estimating actor, partner, and interaction effects for dyadic data using PROC MIXED and HLM: A user-friendly guide. Personal Relationships, 9, 327-342.
6. Carson, R. C. (1969). Interaction concepts of personality. Chicago: Aldine.
7. Cronbach, L. J., & Webb, N. (1975). Between-class and withinclass effects in a reported Aptitude × Treatment interaction: Reanalysis of a study by G. L. Anderson. Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, 717-724.
8. Cudeck, R. (1989). Analysis of correlation matrices using covariance structure models. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 317-327.
9. Giebels, E., De Dreu, C. K. W., & Van de Vliert, E. (2000). Interdependence in negotiation: Effects of exit operations and social motive on distributive and integrative negotiation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 255-272.
10. Gollob, H. F. (1991). Methods for estimating individual- and group-level correlations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 376-381.
11. Gonzalez, R., & Griffin, D. (1997). On the statistics of interdependence: Treating dyadic data with respect. In S. Duck (Ed.), Handbook of personal relationships (pp. 271-302). New York: Wiley.
12. Gonzalez, R., & Griffin, D. (2001). Testing parameters in structural equation modeling: Every "one" matters. Psychological Methods, 6, 258-269.
13. Gonzalez, R., & Griffin, D. (2002). Modeling the personality of dyads and groups. Journal of Personality, 70, 901-924.
14. Griffin, D., & Gonzalez, R. (1995). Correlational analysis of dyad-level data in the exchangeable case. Psychological Bulletin, 118, 430-439.
15. Gundlach, G. T., & Cadotte, E. R. (1994). Exchange interdependence and interfirm interaction: Research in a simulated channel setting. Journal of Marketing Research, 31, 516-532.
16. Heck, R. H. (2001). Multilevel modeling with SEM. In G. A. Marcoulides & R. E. Schumacker (Eds.), New developments and techniques in structural equation modeling (pp. 89-127). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
17. Heise, D. R. (1975). Causal analysis. New York: Wiley.
18. Hinde, R. A. (1997). Relationships: A dialectical perspective. East Sussex, England: Psychology Press.
19. Hoyt, W. T. (2000). Rater bias in psychological research: When is it a problem and what can we do about it? Psychological Methods, 5, 64-86.
20. Hsu, H.-C, & Fogel, A. (2003). Stability and transitions in mother-infant communication during the first 6 months: A microhistorical approach. Developmental Psychology, 39, 1061-1082.
21. James, L. R., Mulaik, S. A., & Brett, J. M. (1982). Causal analysis: Assumptions, models, and data. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
22. James, L. R., & Singh, B. K. (1978). An introduction to the logic, assumptions, and basic analytic procedures of two-stage least squares. Psychological Bulletin, 85, 1104-1122.
23. Jöreskog, K. G. (1971). Statistical sets of congeneric tests. Psychometrika, 36, 109-133.
24. Kashy, D. A., & Kenny, D. A. (2000). The analysis of data from dyads and groups. In H. T. Reis & C. M. Judd (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in social psychology (pp. 451-477). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
25. Kenny, D. A. (1979). Correlation and causality. New York: Wiley.
26. Kenny, D. A. (1988). The analysis of data from two-person relationships. In S. W. Duck (Ed.), Handbook of personal relationships (pp. 57-77). New York: Wiley.
27. Kenny, D. A. (1996). Models of non-independence in dyadic research. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 13, 279-294.
28. Kenny, D. A., & Cook, W. (1999). Partner effects in relationship research: Conceptual issues, analytic difficulties, and illustrations. Personal Relationships, 6, 433-448.
29. Kenny, D. A., & Judd, C. (1986). Consequences of violating the independence assumption in analysis of variance. Psychological Bulletin, 99, 422-431.
30. Kenny, D. A., & La Voie, L. (1985). Separating individual and group effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 339-348.
31. Kiesler, D. J. (1996). Contemporary interpersonal theory and research: Personality, psychopathology, and psychotherapy. New York: Wiley.
32. Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
33. Kraemer, H. C., & Jacklin, C. N. (1979). Statistical analysis of dyadic social behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 217-224.
34. Lord, F. M., & Novick, M. R. (1968). Statistical theories of mental test scores. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.
35. Marsh, H. W., Wen, Z., & Hau, K.-T. (2004). Structural equation models of latent interactions: Evaluation of alternative estimation strategies and indicator construction. Psychological Methods, 9, 275-300.
36. Martin, N. G., & Eaves, L. J. (1977). The genetical analysis of covariance structure. Heredity, 38, 79-95.
37. Murray, S. L., Holmes, J. G., & Griffin, D. W. (1996). The self-fulfilling nature of positive illusions in romantic relationships: Love is not blind but prescient. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 1155-1180.
38. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998-2001). Mplus user's guide (2nd ed.). Los Angeles: Muthn & Muthén.
39. Neyer, F. (2002). The dyadic interdependence of attachment security and dependency: A conceptual replication across older twin pairs and young couples. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 19, 483-503.
40. Rindskopf, D. (1984). Using phantom and imaginary latent variables to parameterize constraints in linear structural models. Psychometrika, 49, 37-47.
41. Ross, H. S., & Lollis, S. P. (1989). A social relations analysis of toddler peer relationships. Child Development, 60, 1082-1091.
42. Russell, D. W., Kahn, J. H., Spoth, R., & Altmaier, E. M. (1998). Analyzing data from experimental studies: A latent variable structural equation modeling approach. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 45, 18-29.
43. Sadler, P., & Woody, E. (2003). Is who you are who you're talking to? Interpersonal style and complementarity in mixed-sex interactions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 8096.
44. Stinson, L., & Ickes, W. (1992). Empathie accuracy in the interactions of male friends versus male strangers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 787-797.
45. Tasca, G. A., & McMullen, L. M. (1992). Interpersonal complementarity and antitheses within a stage model of psychotherapy. Psychotherapy, 29, 515-523.
46. Yammarino, F. J., & Dubinsky, A. J. (1994). Transformational leadership theory: Using levels of analysis to determine boundary conditions. Personnel Psychology, 47, 787-811.
47. Zumbo, B. D., & Zimmerman, D. W. (1991). Further evidence for Coren and Hakstian's "Methodological implications of interaural correlation: Count heads not ears" and an alternative correction formula. Perception and Psychophysics, 50, 297-301.