Search

Multilevel modeling (MLM) is commonly used in psychological research to model clustered data. However, data in applied research usually violate one of the essential assumptions of MLM—homogeneity of variance. While the fixed-effect estimates produced by the maximum likelihood method remain unbiased, the standard errors for the fixed effects are misestimated, resulting in inaccurate inferences and inflated or deflated type I error rates. To correct the bias in fixed effects standard errors and provide valid inferences, small-sample corrections such as the Kenward-Roger (KR) adjustment and the adjusted cluster-robust standard errors (CR-SEs) with the Satterthwaite approximation for t tests have been used. The current study compares KR with random slope (RS) models and the adjusted CR-SEs with ordinary least squares (OLS), random intercept (RI) and RS models to analyze small, heteroscedastic, clustered data using a Monte Carlo simulation. Results show the KR procedure with RS models has large biases and inflated type I error rates for between-cluster effects in the presence of level 2 heteroscedasticity. In contrast, the adjusted CR-SEs generally yield results with acceptable biases and maintain type I error rates close to the nominal level for all examined models. Thus, when the interest is only in within-cluster effect, any model with the adjusted CR-SEs could be used. However, when the interest is to make accurate inferences of the between-cluster effect, researchers should use the adjusted CR-SEs with RS to have higher power and guard against unmodeled heterogeneity. We reanalyzed an example in Snijders & Bosker (2012) to demonstrate the use of the adjusted CR-SEs with different models. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Measurement invariance (MI) of a psychometric scale is a prerequisite for valid group comparisons of the measured construct. While the invariance of loadings and intercepts (i.e., scalar invariance) supports comparisons of factor means and observed means with continuous items, a general belief is that the same holds with ordered-categorical (i.e., ordered-polytomous and dichotomous) items. However, as this paper shows, this belief is only partially true—factor mean comparison is permissible in the correctly specified scalar invariance model with ordered-polytomous items but not with dichotomous items. Furthermore, rather than scalar invariance, full strict invariance—invariance of loadings, thresholds, intercepts, and unique factor variances in all items—is needed when comparing observed means with both ordered-polytomous and dichotomous items. In a Monte Carlo simulation study, we found that unique factor noninvariance led to biased estimations and inferences (e.g., with inflated type I error rates of 19.52%) of (a) the observed mean difference for both ordered-polytomous and dichotomous items and (b) the factor mean difference for dichotomous items in the scalar invariance model. We provide a tutorial on invariance testing with ordered-categorical items as well as suggestions on mean comparisons when strict invariance is violated. In general, we recommend testing strict invariance prior to comparing observed means with ordered-categorical items and adjusting for partial invariance to compare factor means if strict invariance fails. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Measurement invariance is the condition that an instrument measures a target construct in the same way across subgroups, settings, and time. In psychological measurement, usually only partial, but not full, invariance is achieved, which potentially biases subsequent parameter estimations and statistical inferences. Although existing literature shows that a correctly specified partial invariance model can remove such biases, it ignores the model uncertainty in the specification search step: flagging the wrong items may lead to additional bias and variability in subsequent inferences. On the other hand, several new approaches, including Bayesian approximate invariance and alignment optimization methods, have been proposed; these methods use an approximate invariance model to adjust for partial measurement invariance without the need to directly identify noninvariant items. However, there has been limited research on these methods in situations with a small number of groups. In this paper, we conducted three systematic simulation studies to compare five methods for adjusting partial invariance. While specification search performed reasonably well when the proportion of noninvariant parameters was no more than one-third, alignment optimization overall performed best across conditions in terms of efficiency of parameter estimates, confidence interval coverage, and type I error rates. In addition, the Bayesian version of alignment optimization performed best for estimating latent means and variances in small-sample and low-reliability conditions. We thus recommend the use of the alignment optimization methods for adjusting partial invariance when comparing latent constructs across a few groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This 12-month longitudinal study investigated the incidence of probable depression (i.e., changes in Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale [CES-D] scores from < 16 at the baseline to ≥ 16 at the follow-up) and its psychosocial predictors among secondary 1–4 students (N = 9666) in Hong Kong, China. Of the 4100 non-probable depression participants (CES-D < 16) at baseline, data obtained from the baseline and longitudinal surveys of 3584 (87.4%) participants could be matched and were analyzed. The incidence of probable depression was 46.60 per 100 person-years. Adjusted for all background factors, negative life events, loneliness, and social anxiety were significant risk factors, while self-esteem, self-efficacy, positive affect, and family support were protective predictors of incident depression. Female sex was a risk factor but the interactions between sex and the psychosocial factors in determining incident probable depression were statistically non-significant, except for loneliness. The high incidence of probable depression calls for effective interventions on both sexes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research on nonattachment has consistently shown that it is conducive to psychological well-being and interpersonal outcomes. However, there is a lack of rapid assessment that can provide valid and reliable measure among individuals with different levels of nonattachment. The present study aimed at developing a short form of the Nonattachment Scale (NAS) under the item response theory framework. Study 1 recruited 1019 participants who were mainly students and they completed the Nonattachment Scale. Based on the item information and item location, eight items were selected that yielded satisfactory internal consistency and test information. In study 2, 393 college students were recruited and the criterion validity of the 8-item Nonattachment Scale - Short Form (NAS-SF) was examined. Results showed that the 8-item NAS-SF was correlated with mindfulness (r = .54), mental well-being measures (rs = .46 to.54), psychological distress measures (rs = − .48 to − .57), and social/interpersonal measures (rs = .24 to.41). Findings suggested that the 8-item NAS-SF is a reliable and valid measure that can be applied to individuals with different levels of nonattachment in an efficient way. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study tested the applicability of the theory of planned behavior (TPB) on gambling intention and involvement in a representative Chinese sample in Macao, recruited by a random residential number dialing method. We successfully interviewed 685 respondents, with about one-third of them reporting that they had participated in gambling activities during the 12 months prior to the interview. The results of structural equation modeling suggested that favorable attitudes toward superstition and techniques, poor sense of perceived behavioral control over gambling refusal, and high gambling intention increased vulnerability to excessive gambling involvement. These findings generally support the efficacy of the TPB in explaining gambling intention and involvement among both Chinese gamblers and non-gamblers. Some practical implications of the findings are discussed within the Chinese context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Exposure to aggression during childhood or adolescence has been linked to negative outcomes, including poor future romantic relationship functioning. As a step toward understanding such intergenerational influences, the present study investigates whether aggression exposure in the family-of-origin is associated with negative expectancies of romantic partner interactions when facing a challenging couple discussion. Rejection sensitivity is tested as a mediator of this association, and gender was explored as a potential moderator.Negative expectancies were assessed before a 10-minute discussion about desired changes in the relationship in a sample of young adult dating couples. To test the theorized relationship between variables, the study employed self-report measures of parent aggression, rejection sensitivity, and negative expectancies.Multilevel analyses showed that exposure to family-of-origin aggression was positively associated with negative expectancies about the upcoming change discussion task, even after controlling for dating aggression within the current relationship. Additionally, rejection sensitivity mediated the association between parent aggression and negative expectancies. Gender did not moderate these associations.Findings suggest that individuals who experience aggression in their family-of-origin are more likely to anticipate negative interactions with their dating partner during young adulthood. Results also highlight rejection sensitivity as a key mechanism of this process. Taken together, these findings help to explain why some individuals have negative expectancies as they approach difficult discussions with a romantic partner, which may be a putative link in the intergenerational continuity of aggression.Method: Exposure to aggression during childhood or adolescence has been linked to negative outcomes, including poor future romantic relationship functioning. As a step toward understanding such intergenerational influences, the present study investigates whether aggression exposure in the family-of-origin is associated with negative expectancies of romantic partner interactions when facing a challenging couple discussion. Rejection sensitivity is tested as a mediator of this association, and gender was explored as a potential moderator.Negative expectancies were assessed before a 10-minute discussion about desired changes in the relationship in a sample of young adult dating couples. To test the theorized relationship between variables, the study employed self-report measures of parent aggression, rejection sensitivity, and negative expectancies.Multilevel analyses showed that exposure to family-of-origin aggression was positively associated with negative expectancies about the upcoming change discussion task, even after controlling for dating aggression within the current relationship. Additionally, rejection sensitivity mediated the association between parent aggression and negative expectancies. Gender did not moderate these associations.Findings suggest that individuals who experience aggression in their family-of-origin are more likely to anticipate negative interactions with their dating partner during young adulthood. Results also highlight rejection sensitivity as a key mechanism of this process. Taken together, these findings help to explain why some individuals have negative expectancies as they approach difficult discussions with a romantic partner, which may be a putative link in the intergenerational continuity of aggression.Results: Exposure to aggression during childhood or adolescence has been linked to negative outcomes, including poor future romantic relationship functioning. As a step toward understanding such intergenerational influences, the present study investigates whether aggression exposure in the family-of-origin is associated with negative expectancies of romantic partner interactions when facing a challenging couple discussion. Rejection sensitivity is tested as a mediator of this association, and gender was explored as a potential moderator.Negative expectancies were assessed before a 10-minute discussion about desired changes in the relationship in a sample of young adult dating couples. To test the theorized relationship between variables, the study employed self-report measures of parent aggression, rejection sensitivity, and negative expectancies.Multilevel analyses showed that exposure to family-of-origin aggression was positively associated with negative expectancies about the upcoming change discussion task, even after controlling for dating aggression within the current relationship. Additionally, rejection sensitivity mediated the association between parent aggression and negative expectancies. Gender did not moderate these associations.Findings suggest that individuals who experience aggression in their family-of-origin are more likely to anticipate negative interactions with their dating partner during young adulthood. Results also highlight rejection sensitivity as a key mechanism of this process. Taken together, these findings help to explain why some individuals have negative expectancies as they approach difficult discussions with a romantic partner, which may be a putative link in the intergenerational continuity of aggression.Conclusions: Exposure to aggression during childhood or adolescence has been linked to negative outcomes, including poor future romantic relationship functioning. As a step toward understanding such intergenerational influences, the present study investigates whether aggression exposure in the family-of-origin is associated with negative expectancies of romantic partner interactions when facing a challenging couple discussion. Rejection sensitivity is tested as a mediator of this association, and gender was explored as a potential moderator.Negative expectancies were assessed before a 10-minute discussion about desired changes in the relationship in a sample of young adult dating couples. To test the theorized relationship between variables, the study employed self-report measures of parent aggression, rejection sensitivity, and negative expectancies.Multilevel analyses showed that exposure to family-of-origin aggression was positively associated with negative expectancies about the upcoming change discussion task, even after controlling for dating aggression within the current relationship. Additionally, rejection sensitivity mediated the association between parent aggression and negative expectancies. Gender did not moderate these associations.Findings suggest that individuals who experience aggression in their family-of-origin are more likely to anticipate negative interactions with their dating partner during young adulthood. Results also highlight rejection sensitivity as a key mechanism of this process. Taken together, these findings help to explain why some individuals have negative expectancies as they approach difficult discussions with a romantic partner, which may be a putative link in the intergenerational continuity of aggression. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]