Message/Author 

WAM posted on Wednesday, November 23, 2011  6:47 am



Hello, I tested a reciprocal relationship between two variables (measured at 3 occasions). One of the reviewers insists that the crosslag model must be tested using M+ by taking the multilevel structure of the data (occasions nested within students, which are nested within classrooms) in to account. Is there such a possibility? Thanks, Wond 


Yes, see Example 9.12. 


Hi, I have a question similar to the one asked by the previous poster. I want to test an autoregressive latent trajectory model incorporating 2 variables measured on 3 occasions. However, the data has a nested structure (students within classrooms). The higherorder units aren't of substantial research interest. I know that multilevel latent growth models and multilevel crosslagged models can be tested in Mplus, but I haven't seen anything, either in the Mplus documentation or elsewhere, regarding multilevel ALT models. Can this model be specified in Mplus? If so, would TYPE=TWOLEVEL or TYPE=COMPLEX option be more appropriate? Thanks for any help that you can provide! 


Mplus can estimate multilevel ALT models. I don't have an example. You might want to ask if someone on SEMNET has one. I think TYPE=TWOLEVEL would be the best choice. 


Hello, I am testing a reciprocal and timelagged relationship between two variables (both variables are timevarying measured at 3 occasions). The data has a multilevel structure such that occasions for both variables are nested in person and person nested in teams. You mentioned to see Example 9.12 but I don't know how to apply that example to my model. It has only one timevarying variables. The following is how I enterd the model. VARIABLE: NAMES ARE v001v246; USEVARIABLES ARE v001 v220 v221 v222 v244 v245 v246 ; Missing are all (999); Cluster is v001; ANALYSIS: TYPE IS Twolevel Random; ALGORITHM=INTEGRATION; MODEL: %WITHIN% iw1 sw1  v220@0 v221@1 v222@2; iw2 sw2  v244@0 v245@1 v246@2; iw2 sw2 on iw1; iw1 sw1 on iw2; iw1 with sw1; iw2 with sw2; iw1 with sw2; iw2 with sw1; %BETWEEN% ib2 sb2  v244@0 v245@1 v246@2; v244v246@0; OUTPUT: TECH1 TECH8 CINTERVAL ; Would you please tell me if it is appropriate? 


This looks ok assuming the 2 sets of outcomes are lagged in time. I don't understand why your Between level specification is for only 1 of the 2 processes. 

Back to top 