Longitudinal stability of latent means and individual differences: A unified approach
Abstract
We examined the stability of responses to a multi‐item self‐esteem scale collected on five occasions over an 8‐year period. A wide variety of approaches were critically examined that considered the stability of means, individual differences (i.e., test‐retest correlations), and factor structures using traditional approaches (e.g., ANOVA and correlations) and structural equation models. Structural equation models based on multiple indicators provided a unified analytic approach for evaluating different aspects of stability and offered important advantages over traditional approaches. We describe a hierarchy of invariances and the nature of interpretations that are justified by different patterns of factor structure invariance associated with each level. We conclude that the assumptions underlying the typical repeated‐measures ANOVA approach to testing mean differences in longitudinal data are far more restrictive, less easily tested, and less likely to be met than those in the structural equation modeling approach advocated here, and that the use of ANOVA for this purpose requires a huge leap of faith that can rarely be justified on logical or empirical grounds.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Models for repeatedly measured groups can be tested, which allows one to investigate black-white differences in cognitive development.
“In addition, models for repeatedly measured groups can tested (e.g., Jöreskog, 1979;Marsh & Grayson, 1994, Hanna & Lei, 1985), which allows one to investigate black-white (say) differences in cognitive development.”
From Investigating Spearman's Hypothesis by Means of Multi-Group Confirmatory Factor Analysis (2000) · cites this paper as Marsh & Grayson, 1994
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Marsh, H. W., Trautwein, U., Lüdtke, O., Köller, O., & Baumert, J. (2005) · Child Development · doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2005.00853.x · Cited by 1,198 · see citing works
Self-citationSwami, V., & Barron, D. (2019) · Body Image · doi:10.1016/j.bodyim.2018.08.014 · Cited by 454 · see citing works
Marsh, H. W., Nagengast, B., Morin, A. J. S., Parada, R. H., Craven, R. G., & Hamilton, L. R. (2011) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0024122 · Cited by 232 · see citing works
Self-citationBrent Donnellan, M., Kenny, D. A., Trzesniewski, K. H., Lucas, R. E., & Conger, R. D. (2012) · Journal of Research in Personality · doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2012.07.005 · Cited by 145 · see citing works
“One such debate concerns whether self-esteem is more trait-like or state-like (see Marsh & Grayson, 1994).”
BackgroundMethodInvestigating Spearman's Hypothesis by Means of Multi-Group Confirmatory Factor Analysis
Dolan, C. V. (2000) · Multivariate Behavioral Research · doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr3501_2 · Cited by 99 · see citing works
Keefer, K. V., Holden, R. R., & Parker, J. D. A. (2013) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037/a0033903 · Cited by 95 · see citing works
Pedersen, G., Kvarstein, E. H., & Wilberg, T. (2017) · Personality and Mental Health · doi:10.1002/pmh.1382 · Cited by 90 · see citing works
- Authors
- Marsh, H. W., & Grayson, D.
- Affiliations
- Western Sydney University (AU)
- The University of Sydney (AU)
- ORCID
- Marsh, Herbert W.
- Venue
- Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1994-01
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 317-359
- ISSN
- 1070-5511 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-8007
- OpenAlex
- W2012501317
- Cited by
- 94
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 2.75
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Structural Equation Modeling A Multidisciplinary Journal (publishedVersion)
- Research Bank (Australian Catholic University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
- Keywords
- longitudinal stability, latent means, individual differences, self-esteem, test-retest correlation, factor structure invariance, structural equation modeling, repeated measures ANOVA, multi-item scales
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