Using phantom and imaginary latent variables to parameterize constraints in linear structural models

The most widely-used computer programs for structural equation models analysis are the LISREL series of Jöreskog and Sörbom. The only types of constraints which may be made directly are fixing parameters at a constant value and constraining parameters to be equal. Rindskopf (1983) showed how these simple properties could be used to represent models with more complicated constraints, namely inequality constraints on unique variances. In this paper, two new concepts are introduced which enable a much wider variety of constraints to be made. The concepts, phantom and imaginary latent variables, allow fairly general equality and inequality constraints on factor loadings and structural model coefficients.During the preparation of this article, it was discovered that another researcher, Jack McArdle, had concurrently and independently discovered some of the techniques reported here. While he has chosen not to publish his research, I wish to acknowledge his work. I would like to thank Art Woodward for telling me about sort-of simple structure.     

A general framework for using latent class analysis to test hierarchical and nonhierarchical learning models

Several articles in the past fifteen years have suggested various models for analyzing dichotomous test or questionnaire items which were constructed to reflect an assumed underlying structure. This paper shows that many models are special cases of latent class analysis. A currently available computer program for latent class analysis allows parameter estimates and goodness-of-fit tests not only for the models suggested by previous authors, but also for many models which they could not test with the more specialized computer programs they developed. Several examples are given of the variety of models which may be generated and tested. In addition, a general framework for conceptualizing all such models is given. This framework should be useful for generating models and for comparing various models.     

A general approach to categorical data analysis with missing data,using generalized linear models with composite links

A general approach for analyzing categorical data when there are missing data is described and illustrated. The method is based on generalized linear models with composite links. The approach can be used (among other applications) to fill in contingency tables with supplementary margins, fit loglinear models when data are missing, fit latent class models (without or with missing data on observed variables), fit models with fused cells (including many models from genetics), and to fill in tables or fit models to data when variables are more finely categorized for some cases than others. Both Newton-like and EM methods are easy to implement for parameter estimation.The author thanks the editor, the reviewers, Laurie Hopp Rindskopf, and Clifford Clogg for comments and suggestions that substantially improved the paper.     

Parameterizing inequality constraints on unique variances in linear structural models

Current computer programs for analyzing linear structural models will apparently handle only two types of constraints: fixed parameters, and equality of parameters. An important constraint not handled is inequality; this is particularly crucial for preventing negative variance estimates. In this paper, a method is described for imposing several kinds of inequality constraints in models, without the necessity for having computer programs which explicitly allow such constraints. The examples discussed include the prevention of Heywood cases, extension to inequalities of parameters to be greater than a specified value, and imposing ordered inequalities. Work on this project was aided by the City University of New York—Professional Staff Congress Research Award Program Grant Number 13631.     

Nonlinear Bayesian analysis for single case designs

Several authors have suggested the use of multilevel models for the analysis of data from single case designs. Multilevel models are a logical approach to analyzing such data, and deal well with the possible different time points and treatment phases for different subjects. However, they are limited in several ways that are addressed by Bayesian methods. For small samples Bayesian methods fully take into account uncertainty in random effects when estimating fixed effects; the computational methods now in use can fit complex models that represent accurately the behavior being modeled; groups of parameters can be more accurately estimated with shrinkage methods; prior information can be included; and interpretation is more straightforward. The computer programs for Bayesian analysis allow many (nonstandard) nonlinear models to be fit; an example using floor and ceiling effects is discussed here.     

Bayesian estimates of autocorrelations in single-case designs

Researchers in the single-case design tradition have debated the size and importance of the observed autocorrelations in those designs. All of the past estimates of the autocorrelation in that literature have taken the observed autocorrelation estimates as the data to be used in the debate. However, estimates of the autocorrelation are subject to great sampling error when the design has a small number of time points, as is typically the situation in single-case designs. Thus, a given observed autocorrelation may greatly over- or underestimate the corresponding population parameter. This article presents Bayesian estimates of the autocorrelation that greatly reduce the role of sampling error, as compared to past estimators. Simpler empirical Bayes estimates are presented first, in order to illustrate the fundamental notions of autocorrelation sampling error and shrinkage, followed by fully Bayesian estimates, and the difference between the two is explained. Scripts to do the analyses are available as supplemental materials. The analyses are illustrated using two examples from the single-case design literature. Bayesian estimation warrants wider use, not only in debates about the size of autocorrelations, but also in statistical methods that require an independent estimate of the autocorrelation to analyze the data.     

Next steps in Bayesian structural equation models: Comments on, variations of, and extensions to Muthén and Asparouhov (2012)

Muthén and Asparouhov (2012) made a strong case for the advantages of Bayesian methodology in factor analysis and structural equation models. I show additional extensions and adaptations of their methods and show how non-Bayesians can take advantage of many (though not all) of these advantages by using interval restrictions on parameters. By keeping parameters restricted to intervals (such as loadings between -.3 and .3 to produce small loadings), frequentists using standard structural equation modeling software can do something similar to what a Bayesian does by putting prior distributions on these parameters. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved).