Decomposing group differences of latent means of ordered categorical variables within a genetic factor model.

Psychological Sciences, University of Missouri, 200 South 7th Street, Psychology Building, Columbia, MO 65211, USA.
Behavior Genetics (Impact Factor: 2.84). 12/2008; 39(1):101-22. DOI: 10.1007/s10519-008-9237-9
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT A genetic factor model is introduced for decomposition of group differences of the means of phenotypic behavior as well as individual differences when the research variables under consideration are ordered categorical. The model employs the general Genetic Factor Model proposed by Neale and Cardon (Methodology for genetic studies of twins and families, 1992) and, more specifically, the extension proposed by Dolan et al. (Behav Genet 22: 319-335, 1992) which enables decomposition of group differences of the means associated with genetic and environmental factors. Using a latent response variable (LRV) formulation (Muthén and Asparouhov, Latent variable analysis with categorical outcomes: multiple-group and growth modeling in Mplus. Mplus web notes: No. 4, Version 5, 2002), proportional differences of response categories between groups are modeled within the genetic factor model in terms of the distributional differences of latent response variables assumed to underlie the observed ordered categorical variables. Use of the proposed model is illustrated using a measure of conservatism in the data collected from the Australian Twin Registry.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Partridge and Lerner (2007), in a secondary analysis of the New York Longitudinal Study, employed a chronometric polynomial growth curve model to argue that the developmental course of difficult temperament follows a non-linear trajectory over the first 5 years of life. The free curve slope intercept (FCSI) growth curve model of Meredith and Tisak (1990) is presented as a preferable conceptual alternative because it contains a number of currently popular statistical models, including repeated measures multivariate analysis of variance, factor mean, linear growth, linear factor analysis, and hierarchical linear models as special cases. As such, researchers can compare the fit of each of these models relative to the FCSI model, and, at times, to each other. The present paper conducts a re-analysis of the data, and establishes that fit of the FCSI model is arguably better than other statistical alternatives. The FCSI model is also used as the basis for identifying subgroups of individuals with their qualitatively distinct growth patterns within a growth mixture modeling framework. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
    Infant and Child Development 03/2011; 20(2):194 - 212. DOI:10.1002/icd.692 · 1.20 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Although it has been recognized that the course of alcoholism may differ across individuals, little work has characterized drinking trajectories from drinking onset to midlife. The current study examined trajectories of alcohol dependence from adolescence to the mid-50s in a sample of 420 men with a lifetime diagnosis of alcohol dependence. Men from the Vietnam Era Twin Registry were given the Lifetime Drinking History, which assesses the patterns of alcohol consumption and diagnostic symptoms for self-defined drinking phases. Phase data were converted into person-year data, with alcohol-dependence diagnosis coded as present or absent for each of 13 age groupings, starting with up to age 20 and ending with ages 54-56. Latent growth mixture modeling was used to define four drinking trajectories: young-adult, late-onset, severe-nonchronic, and severe-chronic alcoholics. Further analyses with other diagnostic variables, other drinking variables, alcohol expectancies, personality scales, and religiousness scores were completed to differentiate men best categorized by each trajectory. Extension of Latent Growth Mixture Modeling (LGMM) into the mid-50s revealed that, although some individuals remain chronic alcohol users, others decline in alcohol problem use. Differences seen among these groups may help in the treatment of alcohol dependence, such that more energy can be spent treating those likely to be in the more severe trajectories.
    Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs 11/2009; 70(6):859-69. · 2.27 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: There is evidence that measures of alcohol consumption, dependence and abuse are valid indicators of qualitatively different subtypes of alcohol involvement yet also fall along a continuum. The present study attempts to resolve the extent to which variations in alcohol involvement reflect a difference in kind versus a difference in degree. Method Data were taken from the 2001-2002 National Epidemiologic Survey of Alcohol and Related Conditions. The sample (51% male; 72% white/non-Hispanic) included respondents reporting past 12-month drinking at both waves (wave 1: n = 33644; wave 2: n = 25186). We compared factor mixture models (FMMs), a hybrid of common factor analysis (FA) and latent class analysis (LCA), against FA and LCA models using past 12-month alcohol use disorder (AUD) criteria and five indicators of alcohol consumption reflecting frequency and heaviness of drinking. RESULTS: Model comparison revealed that the best-fitting model at wave 1 was a one-factor four-class FMM, with classes primarily varying across dependence and consumption indices. The model was replicated using wave 2 data, and validated against AUD and dependence diagnoses. Class stability from waves 1 to 2 was moderate, with greatest agreement for the infrequent drinking class. Within-class associations in the underlying latent factor also revealed modest agreement over time. CONCLUSIONS: There is evidence that alcohol involvement can be considered both categorical and continuous, with responses reduced to four patterns that quantitatively vary along a single dimension. Nosologists may consider hybrid approaches involving groups that vary in pattern of consumption and dependence symptomatology as well as variation of severity within group.
    Psychological Medicine 04/2013; DOI:10.1017/S0033291713000573 · 5.43 Impact Factor


Available from
May 27, 2014