Structural equation modeling with interchangeable dyads

Psychological Methods

Volumn 11, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 127-141

  Olsen, Joseph A ^a   Kenny, David A ^b  

^a BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT   (United States)

Author keywords

Actor partner interdependence model; Dyads; Intraclass correlation; Structural equation modeling

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPUTER PROGRAM; EPIDEMIOLOGY; HUMAN; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL MODEL;

BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; HUMANS; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; MODELS, STATISTICAL; SOFTWARE;

EID: 33745686559     PISSN: 1082989X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/1082-989X.11.2.127     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Arbuckle, J. L. (2003). Amos 5.0 update to the Amos user's guide. Chicago: Smallwaters.
2. Bauer, D. J. (2003). Estimating multilevel linear models as structural equation models. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 28, 135-167.
3. Bollen, K. A., & Curran, P. J. (2006). Latent curve models: A structural equation perspective. New York: Wiley.
4. Brim, O. G., Baltes, P. B., Bumpass, L. L., Cleary, P. D., Featherman, D. L., Hazzard, W. R., et al. (2003). National Survey of Midlife Development in the United States (MIDUS), 1995-1996 [Computer file] (2nd ICPSR version). Ann Arbor, MI: Interuniversity Consortium for Political and Social Research [Distributor].
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. Cook, W. L. (1994). A structural equation model of dyadic relationships within the family system. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 62, 500-509.
7. Curran, P. J. (2003). Have multilevel models been structural equation models all along? Multivariate Behavioral Research, 38, 529-559.
8. Duncan, T. E., Duncan, S. C., Strycker, L. A., Li, F., & Alpert, A. (1999). An introduction to latent growth curve modeling. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
9. Gonzalez, R., & Griffin, D. (2002). Modeling the personality of dyads and groups. Journal of Personality, 70, 901-924.
10. Griffin, D., & Gonzalez, R. (1995). Correlational analysis of dyad-level data in the exchangeable case. Psychological Bulletin, 118, 430-439.
11. Heck, R. H., & Thomas, S. L. (2000). An introduction to multilevel modeling techniques. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
12. Hox, J. (2002). Multilevel analysis: Techniques and applications. Mahwah, NJ: Hrlbaum.
13. Hox, J. J., & Maas, C. J. M. (2001). The accuracy of multilevel structural equation modeling with pseudobalanced groups and small samples. Structural Equation Modeling, 8, 157-174.
14. Kenny, D. A. (1996). Models of non-independence in dyadic research. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 13, 279-294.
15. Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., & Cook, W. L. (2006). The analysis of dyadic data. New York: Guilford Press.
16. Kline, R. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
17. Kurdek, L. A. (2003). Methodological issues in growth-curve analyses with married couples. Personal Relationships, 10, 235-266.
18. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2001). Mplus user's guide. Los Angeles: University of California.
19. Neyer, F. J. (2002). The dyadic interdependence of attachment security and dependency: A conceptual replication across older twin pairs and younger couples. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 19, 483-503.
20. Rowe, D. C., & Cleveland, H. H. (1996). Academic achievement in Blacks and Whites: Are the developmental processes similar? Intelligence, 23, 205-228.
21. Singer, J. D., & Willett, J. B. (2003). Applied longitudinal data analysis. New York: Oxford University Press.
22. Snijders, T. A. D., & Bosker, R. J. (1999). Multilevel analysis. London: Sage.
23. Widaman, K. F., & Thompson, J. S. (2000). On specifying the null model for incremental fit indices in structural equation modeling. Psychological Methods, 8, 16-37.
24. Woody, E., & Sadler, P. (2005). Structural equation models for interchangeable dyads: Being the same makes a difference. Psychological Methods, 10, 139-158.