Cross-lagged model PreviousNext
Mplus Discussion > Structural Equation Modeling >
Message/Author
 Lucia Salinas posted on Wednesday, April 22, 2015 - 5:04 am
Hello Drs Muthen,

I specified a cross-lagged model using MLR with two waves and 5 variables (1 = manifest, continuous + 4 = latent factors assuming strong measurement invariance). This model and moderations by age and gender (via multi-group) worked fine.

I was asked to rerun this model including only manifest, binary variables to assess the clinical meaningfulness. I'm wondering if it's adequate to specify such a model? If yes, is this specification done properly using WLSMV:

X1 ON SES;
X2-4 ON age gender SES;

Y1 ON SES;
Y2-4 ON age gender SES;

X1 WITH X2 X3 X4 X5;
X2 WITH X3 X4 X5;
X3 WITH X4 X5;
X4 WITH X5;

Y1 WITH Y2@0 X3@0 X4@0 X5@0;
Y2 WITH Y3@0 X4@0 X5@0;
Y3 WITH Y4@0 X5@0;
Y4 WITH Y5@0;

Y2 ON X2 X1;
Y1 ON X1 X2;
Y3 ON X3 X1;
Y1 ON X1 X3;
Y4 ON X4 X1;
Y1 ON X1 X4;
Y5 ON X5 X1;
Y1 ON X1 X5;

In addition, would you recommend allowing correlations between manifest variables at t2.

Thanks for your help in advance and kind regards!
 Bengt O. Muthen posted on Wednesday, April 22, 2015 - 2:05 pm
Looks ok although I don't understand the argument for dichotomizing to study clinical significance. Regarding correlating variables as t2, I would discuss on SEMNET.
 Lucia Salinas posted on Thursday, April 23, 2015 - 6:29 am
Thank you for your quick response. The variables assessed can be categorized into "normal" vs. "abnormal" scores on the basis of recommended cutoff scores for clinical diagnoses.
Back to top
Add Your Message Here
Post:
Username: Posting Information:
This is a private posting area. Only registered users and moderators may post messages here.
Password:
Options: Enable HTML code in message
Automatically activate URLs in message
Action: