DISTINGUISHING FACTS AND ARTIFACTS IN GROUP-BASED MODELING*

Group-based methodology (SPGM) has been presented as suitable to test for the existence of subpopulations not directly observable. Several criminological studies have used this methodology, and it is fair to say that typological theorizing has been spurred by its development. In particular, much of the empirical support for Moffitt's taxonomy (1993, 2006) is from studies using SPGM. In a small simulation experiment, I investigate whether SPGM is suitable for such tests, and I examine the extent to which similar trajectories might equally well result from mechanisms suggested by general theories. I conclude that, as it is usually applied, SPGM cannot provide evidence either for or against a taxonomy and that the usual findings can be explained by competing theories. I argue that this result is not only because of the methodology characteristics but also because of the modeling strategy applied.

[1]  J. Armstrong,et al.  Derivation of Theory by Means of Factor Analysis or Tom Swift and His Electric Factor Analysis Machine , 2015 .

[2]  T. Allard,et al.  Understanding Juvenile Offending Trajectories , 2008 .

[3]  Frauke Kreuter,et al.  Analyzing Criminal Trajectory Profiles: Bridging Multilevel and Group-based Approaches Using Growth Mixture Modeling , 2008 .

[4]  P. Rosenbaum,et al.  Combining group-based trajectory modeling and propensity score matching for causal inferences in nonexperimental longitudinal data. , 2008, Developmental psychology.

[5]  Markus Breitenbach,et al.  Towards an Explanatory Taxonomy of Adolescent Delinquents: Identifying Several Social-Psychological Profiles , 2008 .

[6]  Daniel J. Bauer.  Observations on the Use of Growth Mixture Models in Psychological Research , 2007 .

[7]  Daniel S. Nagin,et al.  Advances in Group-Based Trajectory Modeling and an SAS Procedure for Estimating Them , 2007 .

[8]  Richie Poulton,et al.  Prediction of differential adult health burden by conduct problem subtypes in males. , 2007, Archives of general psychiatry.

[9]  M. Neale,et al.  Distinguishing Between Latent Classes and Continuous Factors: Resolution by Maximum Likelihood? , 2006, Multivariate behavioral research.

[10]  Bengt Muthén,et al.  Should substance use disorders be considered as categorical or dimensional? , 2006, Addiction.

[11]  L. Wasserman,et al.  Exploring Some Analytical Characteristics of Finite Mixture Models , 2006 .

[12]  Daniel J Bauer,et al.  Local solutions in the estimation of growth mixture models. , 2006, Psychological methods.

[13]  Robert J. Sampson,et al.  SEDUCTIONS OF METHOD: REJOINDER TO NAGIN AND TREMBLAY'S "DEVELOPMENTAL TRAJECTORY GROUPS: FACT OR FICTION?" , 2005 .

[14]  Richard E. Tremblay,et al.  DEVELOPMENTAL TRAJECTORY GROUPS: FACT OR A USEFUL STATISTICAL FICTION?* , 2005 .

[15]  Karen Bandeen-Roche,et al.  Residual Diagnostics for Growth Mixture Models , 2005 .

[16]  M. Windle,et al.  Assessing Covariates of Adolescent Delinquency Trajectories: A Latent Growth Mixture Modeling Approach , 2004 .

[17]  Alan Agresti,et al.  Examples in which misspecification of a random effects distribution reduces efficiency, and possible remedies , 2004, Comput. Stat. Data Anal..

[18]  J. Laub,et al.  Methodological Sensitivities to Latent Class Analysis of Long-Term Criminal Trajectories , 2004 .

[19]  Daniel J Bauer,et al.  The integration of continuous and discrete latent variable models: potential problems and promising opportunities. , 2004, Psychological methods.

[20]  Daniel J Bauer,et al.  Distributional assumptions of growth mixture models: implications for overextraction of latent trajectory classes. , 2003, Psychological methods.

[21]  K. Roeder,et al.  A SAS Procedure Based on Mixture Models for Estimating Developmental Trajectories , 2001 .

[22]  Patrick Lindsey,et al.  Diagnostic tools from random effects in the repreated measures growth curve model , 2000 .

[23]  Kathryn Roeder,et al.  Modeling Uncertainty in Latent Class Membership: A Case Study in Criminology , 1999 .

[24]  Daniel S. Nagin,et al.  Analyzing developmental trajectories: A semiparametric, group-based approach , 1999 .

[25]  K. Land,et al.  How Many Latent Classes of Delinquent/ Criminal Careers? Results from Mixed Poisson Regression Analyses1 , 1998, American Journal of Sociology.

[26]  Linda Mealey,et al.  The sociobiology of sociopathy: An integrated evolutionary model , 1995 .

[27]  T. Moffitt,et al.  LIFE-COURSE TRAJECTORIES OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF OFFENDERS* , 1995 .

[28]  T. Moffitt.  Adolescence-limited and life-course-persistent antisocial behavior: a developmental taxonomy. , 1993, Psychological review.

[29]  K. Land,et al.  AGE, CRIMINAL CAREERS, AND POPULATION HETEROGENEITY: SPECIFICATION AND ESTIMATION OF A NONPARAMETRIC, MIXED POISSON MODEL* , 1993 .

[30]  Daniel S. Nagin,et al.  ON THE RELATIONSHIP OF PAST TO FUTURE PARTICIPATION IN DELINQUENCY , 1991 .

[31]  W. A. Nicewander,et al.  A LATENT TRAIT APPROACH TO UNIFYING CRIMINAL CAREERS , 1990 .

[32]  D. Freedman.  A Note on Screening Regression Equations , 1983 .

[33]  H. J. Einhorn.  ALCHEMY IN THE BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES , 1972 .

[34]  A. L. Smith.  LIFE IN WARTIME GERMANY: COLONEL OHLENDORF'S OPINION SERVICE , 1972 .

[35]  M. Bates,et al.  Adolescence-limited versus persistent delinquency: extending Moffitt's hypothesis into adulthood. , 2001, Journal of abnormal psychology.