Structural equation modeling of multitrait-multimethod data: different models for different types of methods.

The question as to which structural equation model should be selected when multitrait-multimethod (MTMM) data are analyzed is of interest to many researchers. In the past, attempts to find a well-fitting model have often been data-driven and highly arbitrary. In the present article, the authors argue that the measurement design (type of methods used) should guide the choice of the statistical model to analyze the data. In this respect, the authors distinguish between (a) interchangeable methods, (b) structurally different methods, and (c) the combination of both kinds of methods. The authors present an appropriate model for each type of method. All models allow separating measurement error from trait influences and trait-specific method effects. With respect to interchangeable methods, a multilevel confirmatory factor model is presented. For structurally different methods, the correlated trait-correlated (method-1) model is recommended. Finally, the authors demonstrate how to appropriately analyze data from MTMM designs that simultaneously use interchangeable and structurally different methods. All models are applied to empirical data to illustrate their proper use. Some implications and guidelines for modeling MTMM data are discussed.

[1]  D. Campbell,et al.  Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. , 1959, Psychological bulletin.

[2]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  An empirical application of confirmatory factor analysis to the multitrait-multimethod matrix , 1976 .

[3]  M. M. Lefkowitz,et al.  Assessment of childhood depression. , 1980, Journal of consulting and clinical psychology.

[4]  K. Widaman Hierarchically Nested Covariance Structure Models for Multitrait-Multimethod Data , 1985 .

[5]  M. Kovacs The Children's Depression, Inventory (CDI). , 1985, Psychopharmacology bulletin.

[6]  David A. Kenny,et al.  Accuracy in interpersonal perception: a social relations analysis. , 1987 .

[7]  H. Marsh,et al.  A new, more powerful approach to multitrait-multimethod analyses: Application of second-order confirmatory factor analysis. , 1988 .

[8]  H. Marsh Confirmatory Factor Analyses of Multitrait-Multimethod Data: Many Problems and a Few Solutions , 1989 .

[9]  David Watson,et al.  Self- versus peer ratings of specific emotional traits: Evidence of convergent and discriminant validity , 1991 .

[10]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  Analysis of the multitrait^multimethod matrix by confirmatory factor analysis , 1992 .

[11]  B. Byrne,et al.  Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Multitrait-Multimethod Self-concept Data: Between-group and Within-group Invariance Constraints. , 1993, Multivariate behavioral research.

[12]  H. Marsh Multitrait-Multimethod Analyses: Inferring Each Trait-Method Combination with Multiple Indicators. , 1993 .

[13]  B. Muthén,et al.  Multilevel Covariance Structure Analysis , 1994 .

[14]  Herbert W. Marsh,et al.  Latent variable models of multitrait-multimethod data. , 1995 .

[15]  S. Fiske,et al.  Personality Research, Methods, and Theory : A Festschrift Honoring Donald W. Fiske , 1995 .

[16]  Werner Wothke,et al.  Covariance components analysis of the multitrait-multimethod matrix. , 1995 .

[17]  D. Cole,et al.  Modeling causal relations between academic and social competence and depression: a multitrait-multimethod longitudinal study of children. , 1996, Journal of abnormal psychology.

[18]  R. Hoyle Structural equation modeling: concepts, issues, and applications , 1997 .

[19]  D. Cole,et al.  A competency-based model of child depression: a longitudinal study of peer, parent, teacher, and self-evaluations. , 1997, Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, and allied disciplines.

[20]  C. Reynolds,et al.  What I Think and Feel: A Revised Measure of Children's Manifest Anxiety , 1997, Journal of abnormal child psychology.

[21]  Roel Bosker,et al.  Multilevel analysis : an introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling , 1999 .

[22]  A. Grob,et al.  Dimensional models of core affect: a quantitative comparison by means of structural equation modeling , 2000 .

[23]  Michael Eid,et al.  A multitrait-multimethod model with minimal assumptions , 2000 .

[24]  Steven D. Brown,et al.  Handbook of applied multivariate statistics and mathematical modeling , 2000 .

[25]  D. Watson,et al.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Self-other Agreement in Personality and Affectivity: the Role of Acquaintanceship, Trait Visibility, and Assumed Similarity , 2022 .

[26]  M. Julian The Consequences of Ignoring Multilevel Data Structures in Nonhierarchical Covariance Modeling , 2001 .

[27]  T. Little,et al.  To Parcel or Not to Parcel: Exploring the Question, Weighing the Merits , 2002 .

[28]  Timothy J. Robinson,et al.  Multilevel Analysis: Techniques and Applications , 2002 .

[29]  Steven E. Scullen,et al.  A critique of the correlated trait-correlated method and correlated uniqueness models for multitrait-multimethod data. , 2002, Psychological methods.

[30]  Patrick J Curran,et al.  Have Multilevel Models Been Structural Equation Models All Along? , 2003, Multivariate behavioral research.

[31]  Scott B. MacKenzie,et al.  Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. , 2003, The Journal of applied psychology.

[32]  M. Eid,et al.  Separating trait effects from trait-specific method effects in multitrait-multimethod models: a multiple-indicator CT-C(M-1) model. , 2003, Psychological methods.

[33]  Michael C Neale,et al.  People are variables too: multilevel structural equations modeling. , 2005, Psychological methods.

[34]  E. Diener,et al.  Handbook of Multimethod Measurement in Psychology , 2005 .

[35]  Michael Eid,et al.  Introduction: The Need for Multimethod Measurement in Psychology. , 2006 .

[36]  Michael Eid,et al.  Structural Equation Models for Multitrait-Multimethod Data , 2006 .

[37]  Michael Eid,et al.  On the meaning of the latent variables in the CT-C(M-1) model: a comment on Maydeu-Olivares and Coffman (2006). , 2008, Psychological methods.