Message/Author |
|
|
Hi there, I noticed that there is some variability in how cross-level interactions are estimated in the literature. Here's a basic model, as specified in the MPlus Users' Guide: %WITHIN% s | y ON x; %BETWEEN% y s ON w xm; y WITH S; Some people include the "y WITH s;" statement to estimate the residual correlation between the slope and DV, whereas others do not. What is the rationale for including the "y WITH s;" statement? Are there situations where it is sensible to leave that statement out? Thanks! |
|
|
If you don't get y WITH s by default you should include it. It is simply very likely that they are correlated. |
|
Tengiat Loi posted on Thursday, April 04, 2019 - 9:58 am
|
|
|
Dr. Muthen, If there are two DVs. %WITHIN% s1 | y1 ON x; s2 | y2 ON x; %BETWEEN% y1 y2 s1 s2 ON w xm; y1 WITH s1; y2 WITH s2; Should we also correlate below? s1 with s2 y2; y1 with y2 s2; |
|
|
I would add correlations between all the DVs. |
|
Tengiat Loi posted on Friday, April 05, 2019 - 10:01 am
|
|
|
Thanks Bengt. If extending this concept to a simple mediation with two DVs. %WITHIN% c1 | y1 ON x; c2 | y2 ON x; a | m ON x; b1 | y1 ON m; b2 | y2 ON m; 1. Should we also correlate all below in between? %BETWEEN% y1 with y2 m b2 b1 a c2 c1; y2 with m b2 b1 a c2 c1; m with b2 b1 a c2 c1; b2 with b1 a c2 c1; b1 with a c2 c1; a with c2 c1; c2 with c1; 2. Can we remove them if they are not significant? |
|
|
1. Yes. 2. Sure. |
|
Tengiat Loi posted on Saturday, April 06, 2019 - 3:48 pm
|
|
|
1. Why should we correlate residuals between mediator and DV? It seems we usually don't follow this practice at single level study. |
|
|
But on Between you don't have Y ON M so that is different from the single-level case. You are just specifying a free covariance matrix for all your random effects. |
|
Back to top |