在密集的纵向数据中粗心响应检测中的测量不变性违规:探索性与部分约束的潜在马尔可夫因子分析。

IF 5.3 3区 心理学 Q1 MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS
Leonie V D E Vogelsmeier, Joran Jongerling, Esther Ulitzsch
{"title":"在密集的纵向数据中粗心响应检测中的测量不变性违规:探索性与部分约束的潜在马尔可夫因子分析。","authors":"Leonie V D E Vogelsmeier, Joran Jongerling, Esther Ulitzsch","doi":"10.1080/00273171.2025.2492016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Intensive longitudinal data (ILD) collection methods like experience sampling methodology can place significant burdens on participants, potentially resulting in careless responding, such as random responding. Such behavior can undermine the validity of any inferences drawn from the data if not properly identified and addressed. Recently, a confirmatory mixture model (here referred to as fully constrained latent Markov factor analysis, LMFA) has been introduced as a promising solution to detect careless responding in ILD. However, this method relies on the key assumption of measurement invariance of the attentive responses, which is easily violated due to shifts in how participants interpret items. If the assumption is violated, the ability of the fully constrained LMFA to accurately identify careless responding is compromised. In this study, we evaluated two more flexible variants of LMFA-fully exploratory LMFA and partially constrained LMFA-to distinguish between careless and attentive responding in the presence of non-invariant attentive responses. Simulation results indicated that the fully exploratory LMFA model is an effective tool for reliably detecting and interpreting different types of careless responding while accounting for violations of measurement invariance. Conversely, the partially constrained model struggled to accurately detect careless responses. We end by discussing potential reasons for this.</p>","PeriodicalId":53155,"journal":{"name":"Multivariate Behavioral Research","volume":" ","pages":"1-20"},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Accounting for Measurement Invariance Violations in Careless Responding Detection in Intensive Longitudinal Data: Exploratory vs. Partially Constrained Latent Markov Factor Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Leonie V D E Vogelsmeier, Joran Jongerling, Esther Ulitzsch\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00273171.2025.2492016\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Intensive longitudinal data (ILD) collection methods like experience sampling methodology can place significant burdens on participants, potentially resulting in careless responding, such as random responding. Such behavior can undermine the validity of any inferences drawn from the data if not properly identified and addressed. Recently, a confirmatory mixture model (here referred to as fully constrained latent Markov factor analysis, LMFA) has been introduced as a promising solution to detect careless responding in ILD. However, this method relies on the key assumption of measurement invariance of the attentive responses, which is easily violated due to shifts in how participants interpret items. If the assumption is violated, the ability of the fully constrained LMFA to accurately identify careless responding is compromised. In this study, we evaluated two more flexible variants of LMFA-fully exploratory LMFA and partially constrained LMFA-to distinguish between careless and attentive responding in the presence of non-invariant attentive responses. Simulation results indicated that the fully exploratory LMFA model is an effective tool for reliably detecting and interpreting different types of careless responding while accounting for violations of measurement invariance. Conversely, the partially constrained model struggled to accurately detect careless responses. We end by discussing potential reasons for this.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":53155,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Multivariate Behavioral Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-20\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Multivariate Behavioral Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2025.2492016\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Multivariate Behavioral Research","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2025.2492016","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

密集的纵向数据(ILD)收集方法,如经验抽样方法,会给参与者带来很大的负担,可能导致粗心的回答,如随机回答。如果不加以适当识别和处理,这种行为可能会破坏从数据中得出的任何推论的有效性。最近,一种验证性混合模型(这里称为完全约束潜马尔可夫因子分析,LMFA)被引入,作为一种有希望的解决方案,可以检测ILD患者的粗心反应。然而,这种方法依赖于注意反应的测量不变性的关键假设,由于参与者如何解释项目的变化,这很容易被违反。如果违反了这一假设,则完全约束LMFA准确识别粗心响应的能力将受到损害。在这项研究中,我们评估了两种更灵活的LMFA变体——完全探索性LMFA和部分约束性LMFA——以区分在非不变注意反应存在时的粗心反应和注意反应。仿真结果表明,全探索性LMFA模型是一种有效的工具,可以可靠地检测和解释不同类型的粗心响应,同时考虑违反测量不变性。相反,部分约束模型很难准确地检测到粗心的反应。最后,我们将讨论造成这种情况的潜在原因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Accounting for Measurement Invariance Violations in Careless Responding Detection in Intensive Longitudinal Data: Exploratory vs. Partially Constrained Latent Markov Factor Analysis.

Intensive longitudinal data (ILD) collection methods like experience sampling methodology can place significant burdens on participants, potentially resulting in careless responding, such as random responding. Such behavior can undermine the validity of any inferences drawn from the data if not properly identified and addressed. Recently, a confirmatory mixture model (here referred to as fully constrained latent Markov factor analysis, LMFA) has been introduced as a promising solution to detect careless responding in ILD. However, this method relies on the key assumption of measurement invariance of the attentive responses, which is easily violated due to shifts in how participants interpret items. If the assumption is violated, the ability of the fully constrained LMFA to accurately identify careless responding is compromised. In this study, we evaluated two more flexible variants of LMFA-fully exploratory LMFA and partially constrained LMFA-to distinguish between careless and attentive responding in the presence of non-invariant attentive responses. Simulation results indicated that the fully exploratory LMFA model is an effective tool for reliably detecting and interpreting different types of careless responding while accounting for violations of measurement invariance. Conversely, the partially constrained model struggled to accurately detect careless responses. We end by discussing potential reasons for this.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Multivariate Behavioral Research
Multivariate Behavioral Research 数学-数学跨学科应用
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
2.60%
发文量
49
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Multivariate Behavioral Research (MBR) publishes a variety of substantive, methodological, and theoretical articles in all areas of the social and behavioral sciences. Most MBR articles fall into one of two categories. Substantive articles report on applications of sophisticated multivariate research methods to study topics of substantive interest in personality, health, intelligence, industrial/organizational, and other behavioral science areas. Methodological articles present and/or evaluate new developments in multivariate methods, or address methodological issues in current research. We also encourage submission of integrative articles related to pedagogy involving multivariate research methods, and to historical treatments of interest and relevance to multivariate research methods.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信