On the Importance of Considering Concurrent Effects in Random-Intercept Cross-Lagged Panel Modelling: Example Analysis of Bullying and Internalising Problems

Random-intercept cross-lagged panel models (RI-CLPMs) are increasingly used to investigate research questions focusing on how one variable at one time point affects another variable at the subsequent time point. Due to the implied temporal sequence of events in such research designs, interpretations of RI-CLPMs primarily focus on longitudinal cross-lagged paths while disregarding concurrent associations and modeling these only as residual covariances. However, this may cause biased cross-lagged effects. This may be especially so when data collected at the same time point refers to different reference timeframes, creating a temporal sequence of events for constructs measured concurrently. To examine this issue, we conducted a series of empirical analyses in which the impact of modeling or not modeling of directional within-time point associations may impact inferences drawn from RI-CLPMs using data from the longitudinal z-proso study. Results highlight that not considering directional concurrent effects may lead to biased cross-lagged effects. Thus, it is essential to carefully consider potential directional concurrent effects when choosing models to analyze directional associations between variables over time. If temporal sequences of concurrent effects cannot be clearly established, testing multiple models and drawing conclusions based on the robustness of effects across all models is recommended.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Multivariate Behavioral Research
Published
2024-11-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2024.2428222
Citations
5
Primary Topic
Qualitative Comparative Analysis Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
5.66

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

On the Importance of Considering Concurrent Effects in Random-Intercept Cross-Lagged Panel Modelling: Example Analysis of Bullying and Internalising Problems

Lydia Gabriela Speyer, Xinxin Zhu, Manuel Eisner, Yi Yang et al.
5 citations
Multivariate Behavioral Research
Qualitative Comparative Analysis Research
5.66
article

On the Importance of Considering Concurrent Effects in Random-Intercept Cross-Lagged Panel Modelling: Example Analysis of Bullying and Internalising Problems

Lydia Gabriela Speyer, Xinxin Zhu, Manuel Eisner, Yi Yang, Denis Ribeaud
article en
5 citations

Abstract

Random-intercept cross-lagged panel models (RI-CLPMs) are increasingly used to investigate research questions focusing on how one variable at one time point affects another variable at the subsequent time point. Due to the implied temporal sequence of events in such research designs, interpretations of RI-CLPMs primarily focus on longitudinal cross-lagged paths while disregarding concurrent associations and modeling these only as residual covariances. However, this may cause biased cross-lagged effects. This may be especially so when data collected at the same time point refers to different reference timeframes, creating a temporal sequence of events for constructs measured concurrently. To examine this issue, we conducted a series of empirical analyses in which the impact of modeling or not modeling of directional within-time point associations may impact inferences drawn from RI-CLPMs using data from the longitudinal z-proso study. Results highlight that not considering directional concurrent effects may lead to biased cross-lagged effects. Thus, it is essential to carefully consider potential directional concurrent effects when choosing models to analyze directional associations between variables over time. If temporal sequences of concurrent effects cannot be clearly established, testing multiple models and drawing conclusions based on the robustness of effects across all models is recommended.

Multivariate Behavioral ResearchVol. 60(2)
University of Zurich (CH), University of Cambridge (GB), Youth Development (US), Institute of Criminology (SI), Jacobs (United States) (US), Lancaster University (GB), University of Edinburgh (GB)
Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung, Jacobs Foundation
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Qualitative Comparative Analysis Research
5.66
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.