Cited by 135Statistical Methods and Bayesian InferencePsychometric Methodologies and TestingBayesian Methods and Mixture Models

The impact of misspecifying class-specific residual variances in growth mixture models

Enders, Craig K., Tofighi, Davood·2008·Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of misspecifying a growth mixture model (GMM) by assuming that Level-1 residual variances are constant across classes, when they do, in fact, vary in each subpopulation. Misspecification produced bias in the within-class growth trajectories and variance components, and estimates were substantially less precise than those obtained from a correctly specified GMM. Bias and precision became worse as the ratio of the largest to smallest Level-1 residual variances increased, class proportions became more disparate, and the number of class-specific residual variances in the population increased. Although the Level-1 residuals are typically of little substantive interest, these results suggest that researchers should carefully estimate and report these parameters in published GMM applications.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/10705510701758281

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 27 · Cited by 135

Authors
Enders, C. K., & Tofighi, D.
Affiliations
Arizona State University (US)
Venue
Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal
Published
2008-01-11
Volume
15
Issue
1
Pages
75-95
ISSN
  • 1070-5511 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-8007
OpenAlex
W1989470692
Cited by
135
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 6
FWCI
3.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Structural Equation Modeling A Multidisciplinary Journal (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Bayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Keywords
growth mixture modeling, model misspecification, variance components, estimation bias, estimation precision

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review