Latent variable GIMME using model implied instrumental variables (MIIVs)

Psychological Methods

Volumn 25, Issue 2, 2020, Pages 227-242

  Gates, Kathleen M ^a   Fisher, Zachary F ^a   Bollen, Kenneth A ^a,b  

^a University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA   (United States)

Author keywords

GIMME; Idiographic filter; Latent variables; MIIV 2S; SEM

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SIMULATION; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PROCEDURES; PSYCHOLOGY; SELF REPORT; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL MODEL;

COMPUTER SIMULATION; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MODELS, STATISTICAL; PSYCHOLOGY; RESEARCH DESIGN; SELF REPORT;

EID: 85068212492     PISSN: 1082989X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/met0000229     Document Type: Article

References (65)

1. Anzman-Frasca, S., Liu, S., Gates, K. M., Paul, I. M., Rovine, M. J., & Birch, L. L. (2013). Infants' transitions out of a fussing/crying state are modifiable and are related to weight status. Infancy, 18, 662-686. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/infa.12002.
2. Beltz, A. M., Beekman, C., Molenaar, P. C. M., & Buss, K. A. (2013). Mapping temporal dynamics in social interactions with unified structural equation modeling: A description and demonstration revealing timedependent sex differences in play behavior. Applied Developmental Science, 17, 152-168. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2013.805953.
3. Beltz, A. M., & Gates, K. M. (2017). Network mapping with GIMME. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 52, 789-804. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2017.1373014.
4. Beltz, A. M., Wright, A. G. C., Sprague, B. N., & Molenaar, P. C. M. (2016). Bridging the nomothetic and idiographic approaches to the analysis of clinical data. Assessment, 23, 447-458. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1073191116648209.
5. Blalock, H. M. (1968). The measurement problem: A gap between the languages of theory and research. In H. M. Blalock & A. B. Blalock (Eds.), Methodology in Social Research (pp. 5-27). Newyork, NY: McGraw-Hill.
6. Bollen, K. A. (1996). An alternative two stage least squares (2SLS) estimator for latent variable equations. Psychometrika, 61, 109-121. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02296961.
7. Bollen, K. A. (2001). Two-stage least squares and latent variable models: Simultaneous estimation and robustness to misspecifications (pp. 119-138).
8. Bollen, K. A. (2012). Instrumental variables in sociology and the social sciences. Annual Review of Sociology, 38, 37-72.
9. Bollen, K. A., Gates, K. M., & Fisher, Z. (2018). Robustness conditions for MIIV-2SLS when the latent variable or measurement model is structurally misspecified. Structural Equation Modeling, 25, 848-859. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2018.1456341.
10. Bollen, K. A., Kirby, J. B., Curran, P. J., Paxton, P. M., & Chen, F. (2007). Latent variable models under misspecification: Two-stage least squares (2SLS) and maximum likelihood (ML) estimators. Sociological Methods & Research, 36(1), 48-86.
11. Bolt, T., Prince, E. B., Nomi, J. S., Messinger, D., Llabre, M. M., & Uddin, L. Q. (2018). Combining region-and network-level brain-behavior relationships in a structural equation model. NeuroImage, 165, 158-169. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.10.007.
12. Bringmann, L. F., Ferrer, E., Hamaker, E. L., Borsboom, D., & Tuerlinckx, F. (2018). Modeling nonstationary emotion dynamics in dyads using a time-varying vector-autoregressive model. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 53, 293-314. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2018.1439722.
13. Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136-162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
14. Chow, S.-M., Ho, M. R., Hamaker, E. L., & Dolan, C. V. (2010). Equivalence and differences between structural equation modeling and statespace modeling techniques. Structural Equation Modeling, 17, 303-332. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10705511003661553.
15. Di Martino, A., Yan, C.-G., Li, Q., Denio, E., Castellanos, F. X., Alaerts, K.,...Milham, M. P. (2014). The autism brain imaging data exchange: Towards a large-scale evaluation of the intrinsic brain architecture in autism. Molecular Psychiatry, 19, 659-667. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/mp.2013.78.
16. Dosenbach, N. U. F., Nardos, B., Cohen, A. L., Fair, D. A., Power, J. D., Church, J. A.,...Schlaggar, B. L. (2010). Prediction of individual brain maturity using fMRI. Science, 329, 1358-1361. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1194144.
17. Epskamp, S., Rhemtulla, M., & Borsboom, D. (2017). Generalized network psychometrics: Combining network and latent variable models. Psychometrika, 82, 904-927. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11336-017-9557-x.
18. Epskamp, S., van Borkulo, C. D., van der Veen, D. C., Servaas, M. N., Isvoranu, A.-M., Riese, H., & Cramer, A. O. J. (2018). Personalized network modeling in psychopathology: The importance of contemporaneous and temporal connections. Clinical Psychological Science, 6, 416-427. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2167702617744325.
19. Fernandez, K. C., Fisher, A. J., & Chi, C. (2017). Development and initial implementation of the Dynamic Assessment Treatment Algorithm (DATA). PLoS ONE, 12, e0178806. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0178806.
20. Finn, E. S., Shen, X., Scheinost, D., Rosenberg, M. D., Huang, J., Chun, M.M.,...Constable, R. T. (2015). Functional connectome fingerprinting: Identifying individuals using patterns of brain connectivity. Nature Neuroscience, 18, 1664-1671. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nn.4135.
21. Fisher, A. J., & Boswell, J. F. (2016). Enhancing the personalization of psychotherapy with dynamic assessment and modeling. Assessment, 23, 496-506. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1073191116638735.
22. Fisher, A. J., Medaglia, J. D., & Jeronimus, B. F. (2018). Lack of groupto-individual generalizability is a threat to human subjects research. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 115, e6106-e6115. http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1711978115.
23. Fisher, Z. F., Bollen, K. A., & Gates, K. M. (2019). A limited information estimator for dynamic factor models. Multivariate Behavioral Research. Advance online publication. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2018.1519406.
24. Fisher, Z. F., Bollen, K. A., Gates, K. M., & Rönkkö, M. (2018). MIIVsem: Model implied instrumental variable (MIIV) estimation of structural equation models. R package Version 0.5.3. Retrieved from https://github.com/zackfisher/MIIVsem.
25. Fuller-Tyszkiewicz, M., Hartley-Clark, L., Cummins, R. A., Tomyn, A. J., Weinberg, M. K., & Richardson, B. (2017). Using dynamic factor analysis to provide insights into data reliability in experience sampling studies. Psychological Assessment, 29, 1120-1128. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/pas0000411.
26. Gates, K. M., Lane, S. T., Varangis, E., Giovanello, K., & Guskiewicz, K. (2017). Unsupervised classification during time-series model building. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 52, 129-148. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2016.1256187.
27. Gates, K. M., & Molenaar, P. C. M. (2012). Group search algorithm recovers effective connectivity maps for individuals in homogeneous and heterogeneous samples. NeuroImage, 63, 310-319. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.06.026.
28. Gates, K. M., Molenaar, P. C. M., Hillary, F. G., Ram, N., & Rovine, M. J. (2010). Automatic search for fMRI connectivity mapping: An alternative to Granger causality testing using formal equivalences among SEM path modeling, VAR, and unified SEM. NeuroImage, 50, 1118-1125. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.12.117.
29. Gates, K. M., Molenaar, P. C. M., Iyer, S. P., Nigg, J. T., & Fair, D. A. (2014). Organizing heterogeneous samples using community detection of GIMME-derived resting state functional networks. PLoS ONE, 9, e91322. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0091322.
30. Gayles, J. G., & Molenaar, P. C. (2013). The utility of person-specific analyses for investigating developmental processes: An analytic primer on studying the individual. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 37, 549-562.
31. Gonzalez-Castillo, J., Hoy, C. W., Handwerker, D. A., Robinson, M. E., Buchanan, L. C., Saad, Z. S., & Bandettini, P. A. (2015). Tracking ongoing cognition in individuals using brief, whole-brain functional connectivity patterns. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 112, 8762-8767. http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1501242112.
32. Hamaker, E. L., Dolan, C. V., & Molenaar, P. C. M. (2005). Statistical modeling of the individual: Rationale and application of multivariate stationary time series analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 40, 207-233. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr4002_3.
33. Henry, T., & Gates, K. (2017). Causal search procedures for fMRI: Review and suggestions. Behaviormetrika, 44, 193-225. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s41237-016-0010-8.
34. Hu, Y., Nesselroade, J. R., Erbacher, M. K., Boker, S. M., Burt, S. A., Keel, P. K.,...Klump, K. (2016). Test reliability at the individual level. Structural Equation Modeling, 23, 532-543. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2016.1148605.
35. Huettel, S. A., Song, A. W., & McCarthy, G. (2004). Functional magnetic resonance imaging (Vol. 1). Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.
36. Jöreskog, K. G. (1977). Structural equation models in continuous observed variables. In P. P. Krishnaiah (Ed.), Extensions of the the social sciences: Specification estimation, and testing, in Applications of Statistics (pp. 265-287). North Holland, Amsterdam.
37. Kim, J., Zhu, W., Chang, L., Bentler, P. M., & Ernst, T. (2007). Unified structural equation modeling approach for the analysis of multisubject, multivariate functional MRI data. Human Brain Mapping, 28, 85-93. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hbm.20259.
38. Lamiell, J. T. (1981). Toward an idiothetic psychology of personality. American Psychologist, 36, 276-289. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.36.3.276.
39. Lane, S. T., & Gates, K. M. (2017). Automated selection of robust individual-level structural equation models for time series data. Structural Equation Modeling, 24, 768-782. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2017.1309978.
40. Lane, S., Gates, K., Fisher, Z. A., & Molenaar, P. (2019). GIMME: Group iterative multiple model estimation [Computer software manual]. Retrieved from https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=gimme.
41. Lane, S. T., Gates, K. M., Pike, H. K., Beltz, A. M., & Wright, A. G. (2019). Uncovering general, shared, and unique temporal patterns in ambulatory assessment data. Psychological methods, 24, 54-69.
42. Laumann, T. O., Gordon, E. M., Adeyemo, B., Snyder, A. Z., Joo, S. J., Chen, M.-Y.,...Petersen, S. E. (2015). Functional system and areal organization of a highly sampled individual human brain. Neuron, 87, 657-670. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2015.06.037.
43. Lebo, M. A., & Nesselroade, J. R. (1978). Intraindividual differences dimensions of mood change during pregnancy identified in five p-technique factor analyses. Journal of Research in Personality, 12, 205-224. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0092-6566(78)90098-3.
44. Logothetis, N. K. (2008). What we can do and what we cannot do with fMRI. Nature, 453, 869-878. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature06976.
45. Lorenzo-Seva, U., & ten Berge, J. M. F. (2006). Tucker's congruence coefficient as a meaningful index of factor similarity. Methodology, 2, 57-64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1027/1614-2241.2.2.57.
46. Miller, M. B., Van Horn, J. D., Wolford, G. L., Handy, T. C., Valsangkar-Smyth, M., Inati, S.,...Gazzaniga, M. S. (2002). Extensive individual differences in brain activations associated with episodic retrieval are reliable over time. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 14, 1200-1214. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/089892902760807203.
47. Molenaar, P. C. M. (1985). A dynamic factor model for the analysis of multivariate time series. Psychometrika, 50, 181-202. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02294246.
48. Molenaar, P. C. M. (2004). A manifesto on psychology as idiographic science: Bringing the person back into scientific psychology, this time forever. Interdisciplinary Research & Perspective, 2, 201-218. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15366359mea0204_1.
49. Molenaar, P. C. M., & Campbell, C. G. (2009). The new person-specific paradigm in psychology. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18, 112-117. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01619.x.
50. Molenaar, P. C. M., & Nesselroade, J. R. (2012). Merging the idiographic filter with dynamic factor analysis to model process. Applied Developmental Science, 16, 210-219. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2012.722884.
51. Mumford, J. A., & Ramsey, J. D. (2014). Bayesian networks for fMRI: A primer. NeuroImage, 86, 573-582. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.10.020.
52. Nesselroade, J. R., Gerstorf, D., Hardy, S. A., & Ram, N. (2007). Focus article: Idiographic filters for psychological constructs. Interdisciplinary Research & Perspective, 5, 217-235. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15366360701741807.
53. Price, R. B., Gates, K., Kraynak, T. E., Thase, M. E., & Siegle, G. J. (2017). Data-driven subgroups in depression derived from directed functional connectivity paths at rest. Neuropsychopharmacology, 42, 2623-2632. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/npp.2017.97.
54. Ram, N., & Grimm, K. J. (2009). Growth mixture modeling: A method for identifying differences in longitudinal change among unobserved groups. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 33, 565-576. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0165025409343765.
55. Ramsey, J. D., Hanson, S. J., & Glymour, C. (2011). Multi-subject search correctly identifies causal connections and most causal directions in the DCM models of the Smith et al. simulation study. NeuroImage, 58, 838-848. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.06.068.
56. R Core Team. (2017). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria. Retrieved from https://www.R-project.org/.
57. Rosseel, Y. (2012). lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software. Advance online publication. http://dx.doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02.
58. Rubel, J. A., Fisher, A. J., Husen, K., & Lutz, W. (2018). Translating person-specific network models into personalized treatments: Development and demonstration of the Dynamic Assessment Treatment Algorithm for Individual Networks (DATA-IN). Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 87, 249-251. http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000487769.
59. Sargan, J. D. (1958). The estimation of economic relationships using instrumental variables. Econometrica, 26, 393-415. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1907619.
60. Sartorius, N., Ustün, T. B., Lecrubier, Y., & Wittchen, H.-U. (1996). Depression comorbid with anxiety: Results from the WHO study on psychological disorders in primary health care. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 168, 38-43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1192/S0007125000298395.
61. Smith, S. M., Miller, K. L., Salimi-Khorshidi, G., Webster, M., Beckmann, C. F., Nichols, T. E.,...Woolrich, M. W. (2011). Network modelling methods for FMRI. NeuroImage, 54, 875-891. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.08.063.
62. Sörbom, D. (1975). Detection of correlated errors in longitudinal data. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 28, 138-151.
63. Wisner, K. M., Atluri, G., Lim, K. O., & Macdonald, A. W., III. (2013). Neurometrics of intrinsic connectivity networks at rest using fMRI: Retest reliability and cross-validation using a meta-level method. NeuroImage, 76, 236-251. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.02.066.
64. Wright, A. G. C., Hallquist, M. N., Morse, J. Q., Scott, L. N., Stepp, S. D., Nolf, K. A., & Pilkonis, P. A. (2013). Clarifying interpersonal heterogeneity in borderline personality disorder using latent mixture modeling. Journal of Personality Disorders, 27, 125-143. http://dx.doi.org/10.1521/pedi.2013.27.2.125.
65. Wright, A. G. C., & Hopwood, C. J. (2016). Advancing the assessment of dynamic psychological processes. Assessment, 23, 399-403. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1073191116654760.