Getting Better All the Time? An Illustrative Investigation of Multilevel Longitudinal Measurement Invariance Based on School Climate Surveys

School climate surveys are central to school improvement and principal evaluation policies. The quality of school climate has been linked both to student achievement and to teacher retention. Oftentimes, policymakers and practitioners are concerned with monitoring change in school climate quality in each academic year. Such applications assume longitudinal factorial invariance—it is presupposed that the surveys are measuring the same things in the same metric at each time point. While there is considerable research examining the validity of inferences based on survey‐derived climate indicators, this research is almost exclusively based on cross‐sectional data. There is little literature describing procedures for gathering evidence of factorial invariance of school climate indicators. This study proposes to adapt existing methods for evaluating factorial invariance in longitudinal designs into multilevel frameworks, and in doing so, articulates a novel method for evaluating longitudinal measurement invariance in school climate research. This technique is illustrated on a widely used school climate survey.     

Measurement Bias Detection Through Factor Analysis

Assessing the correctness of a structural equation model is essential to avoid drawing incorrect conclusions from empirical research. In the past, the chi-square test was recommended for assessing the correctness of the model but this test has been criticized because of its sensitivity to sample size. As a reaction, an abundance of fit indexes have been developed. The result of these developments is that structural equation modeling packages are now producing a large list of fit measures. One would think that this progression has led to a clear understanding of evaluating models with respect to model misspecifications. In this article we question the validity of approaches for model evaluation based on overall goodness-of-fit indexes. The argument against such usage is that they do not provide an adequate indication of the “size” of the model's misspecification. That is, they vary dramatically with the values of incidental parameters that are unrelated with the misspecification in the model. This is illustrated using simple but fundamental models. As an alternative method of model evaluation, we suggest using the expected parameter change in combination with the modification index (MI) and the power of the MI test.     

State-Space Modeling of Dynamic Psychological Processes via the Kalman Smoother Algorithm: Rationale,Finite Sample Properties,and Applications

This article presents a state-space modeling (SSM) technique for fitting process factor analysis models directly to raw data. The Kalman smoother via the expectation-maximization algorithm to obtain maximum likelihood parameter estimates is used. To examine the finite sample properties of the estimates in SSM when common factors are involved, a Monte Carlo study is conducted. Results indicate that the estimates of factor loading matrix, transition matrix, and unique variances were asymptotically normal, accurate, precise, and robust, especially for moderate and long time series. The estimates of state residual variances were positively biased for shorter time series, but as the length of series increased, these estimates became accurate and precise. To illustrate the application of SSM the technique is applied to empirical multivariate time-series data on daily affect collected from 2 individuals in a dating couple.     

A Comparison of Three-Step Approaches for Auxiliary Variables in Latent Class and Latent Profile Analysis

In this article, 3-step methods to include predictors and distal outcomes in commonly used mixture models are evaluated. Two Monte Carlo simulation studies were conducted to compare the pseudo class (PC), Vermunt’s (2010), and the Lanza, Tan, and Bray (LTB) 3-step approaches with respect to bias of parameter estimates in latent class analysis (LCA) and latent profile analysis (LPA) models with auxiliary variables. For coefficients of predictors of class membership, results indicated that Vermunt’s method yielded more accurate estimates for LCA and LPA compared to the PC method. With distal outcomes of latent classes and latent profiles, the LTB method produced the lowest relative bias of coefficient estimates and Type I error rates close to nominal levels.     

The Impact of Noninvariant Intercepts in Latent Means Models

Latent means methods such as multiple-indicator multiple-cause (MIMIC) and structured means modeling (SMM) allow researchers to determine whether or not a significant difference exists between groups' factor means. Strong invariance is typically recommended when interpreting latent mean differences. The extent of the impact of noninvariant intercepts on conclusions made when implementing both MIMIC and SMM methods was the main purpose of this study. The impact of intercept noninvariance on Type I error rates, power, and two model fit indices when using MIMIC and SMM approaches under various conditions were examined. Type I error and power were adversely affected by intercept noninvariance. Although the fit indices did not detect small misspecifications in the form of noninvariant intercepts, one did perform more optimally.     

General Growth Mixture Analysis of Adolescents' Developmental Trajectories of Anxiety: The Impact of Untested Invariance Assumptions on Substantive Interpretations

Substantively, this study investigates potential heterogeneity in the developmental trajectories of anxiety in adolescence. Methodologically, this study demonstrates the usefulness of general growth mixture analysis (GGMA) in addressing these issues and illustrates the impact of untested invariance assumptions on substantive interpretations. This study relied on data from the Montreal Adolescent Depression Development Project (MADDP), a 4-year follow-up of more than 1,000 adolescents who completed the Beck Anxiety Inventory each year. GGMA models relying on different invariance assumptions were empirically compared. Each of these models converged on a 5-class solution, but yielded different substantive results. The model with class-varying variance–covariance matrices was retained as providing a better fit to the data. These results showed that although elevated levels of anxiety might fluctuate over time, they clearly do not represent a transient phenomenon. This model was then validated in relation to multiple predictors (mostly related to school violence) and outcomes (grade-point average, school dropout, depression, loneliness, and drug-related problems).     

Testing Factorial Invariance in Multilevel Data: A Monte Carlo Study

Testing factorial invariance has recently gained more attention in different social science disciplines. Nevertheless, when examining factorial invariance, it is generally assumed that the observations are independent of each other, which might not be always true. In this study, we examined the impact of testing factorial invariance in multilevel data, especially when the dependency issue is not taken into account. We considered a set of design factors, including number of clusters, cluster size, and intraclass correlation (ICC) at different levels. The simulation results showed that the test of factorial invariance became more liberal (or had inflated Type I error rate) in terms of rejecting the null hypothesis of invariance held between groups when the dependency was not considered in the analysis. Additionally, the magnitude of the inflation in the Type I error rate was a function of both ICC and cluster size. Implications of the findings and limitations are discussed.