Measurement error and person-specific reliability in multilevel autoregressive models.

Noémi Schuurman*, E. L. Hamaker

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

Abstract

An increasing number of researchers in psychology are collecting intensive longitudinal data in order to study psychological processes on an intraindividual level. An increasingly popular way to analyze these data is autoregressive time series modeling; either by modeling the repeated measures for a single individual using classic n = 1 autoregressive models, or by using multilevel extensions of these models, with the dynamics for each individual modeled at Level 1 and interindividual differences in these dynamics modeled at Level 2. However, while it is widely accepted in psychology that psychological measurements usually contain a certain amount of measurement error, the issue of measurement error is largely neglected in applied psychological (autoregressive) time series modeling: The regular autoregressive model incorporates innovations, or “dynamic errors,” but not measurement error. In this article we discuss the concepts of reliability and measurement error in the context of dynamic (VAR(1)) models, and the consequences of disregarding measurement error variance in the data. For this purpose, we present a preliminary model that accounts for measurement error for constructs that are measured with a single indicator. We further discuss how this model could be used to investigate the between-person reliability of the measurements, as well as the (person-specific) within-person reliabilities and any individual differences in these reliabilities. We illustrate the consequences of assuming perfect reliability, the preliminary model, and reliabilities, using an empirical application in which we relate women’s general positive affect to their positive affect concerning their romantic relationship.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)70-91
JournalPsychological Methods
Volume24
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2019

Fingerprint

Individuality

Keywords

  • DYNAMICS
  • INERTIA
  • autoregressive modeling
  • intensive longitudinal data
  • measurement error
  • reliability
  • time series analysis

Cite this

@article{4950a7304d94470c904ad2b0bdb1aac3,
title = "Measurement error and person-specific reliability in multilevel autoregressive models.",
abstract = "An increasing number of researchers in psychology are collecting intensive longitudinal data in order to study psychological processes on an intraindividual level. An increasingly popular way to analyze these data is autoregressive time series modeling; either by modeling the repeated measures for a single individual using classic n = 1 autoregressive models, or by using multilevel extensions of these models, with the dynamics for each individual modeled at Level 1 and interindividual differences in these dynamics modeled at Level 2. However, while it is widely accepted in psychology that psychological measurements usually contain a certain amount of measurement error, the issue of measurement error is largely neglected in applied psychological (autoregressive) time series modeling: The regular autoregressive model incorporates innovations, or “dynamic errors,” but not measurement error. In this article we discuss the concepts of reliability and measurement error in the context of dynamic (VAR(1)) models, and the consequences of disregarding measurement error variance in the data. For this purpose, we present a preliminary model that accounts for measurement error for constructs that are measured with a single indicator. We further discuss how this model could be used to investigate the between-person reliability of the measurements, as well as the (person-specific) within-person reliabilities and any individual differences in these reliabilities. We illustrate the consequences of assuming perfect reliability, the preliminary model, and reliabilities, using an empirical application in which we relate women’s general positive affect to their positive affect concerning their romantic relationship.",
keywords = "DYNAMICS, INERTIA, autoregressive modeling, intensive longitudinal data, measurement error, reliability, time series analysis",
author = "No{\'e}mi Schuurman and Hamaker, {E. L.}",
year = "2019",
doi = "10.1037/met0000188",
language = "English",
volume = "24",
pages = "70--91",
journal = "Psychological Methods",
issn = "1082-989X",
publisher = "AMER PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOC",
number = "1",

}

Measurement error and person-specific reliability in multilevel autoregressive models. / Schuurman, Noémi; Hamaker, E. L.

In: Psychological Methods, Vol. 24, No. 1, 2019, p. 70-91.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Measurement error and person-specific reliability in multilevel autoregressive models.

AU - Schuurman, Noémi

AU - Hamaker, E. L.

PY - 2019

Y1 - 2019

N2 - An increasing number of researchers in psychology are collecting intensive longitudinal data in order to study psychological processes on an intraindividual level. An increasingly popular way to analyze these data is autoregressive time series modeling; either by modeling the repeated measures for a single individual using classic n = 1 autoregressive models, or by using multilevel extensions of these models, with the dynamics for each individual modeled at Level 1 and interindividual differences in these dynamics modeled at Level 2. However, while it is widely accepted in psychology that psychological measurements usually contain a certain amount of measurement error, the issue of measurement error is largely neglected in applied psychological (autoregressive) time series modeling: The regular autoregressive model incorporates innovations, or “dynamic errors,” but not measurement error. In this article we discuss the concepts of reliability and measurement error in the context of dynamic (VAR(1)) models, and the consequences of disregarding measurement error variance in the data. For this purpose, we present a preliminary model that accounts for measurement error for constructs that are measured with a single indicator. We further discuss how this model could be used to investigate the between-person reliability of the measurements, as well as the (person-specific) within-person reliabilities and any individual differences in these reliabilities. We illustrate the consequences of assuming perfect reliability, the preliminary model, and reliabilities, using an empirical application in which we relate women’s general positive affect to their positive affect concerning their romantic relationship.

AB - An increasing number of researchers in psychology are collecting intensive longitudinal data in order to study psychological processes on an intraindividual level. An increasingly popular way to analyze these data is autoregressive time series modeling; either by modeling the repeated measures for a single individual using classic n = 1 autoregressive models, or by using multilevel extensions of these models, with the dynamics for each individual modeled at Level 1 and interindividual differences in these dynamics modeled at Level 2. However, while it is widely accepted in psychology that psychological measurements usually contain a certain amount of measurement error, the issue of measurement error is largely neglected in applied psychological (autoregressive) time series modeling: The regular autoregressive model incorporates innovations, or “dynamic errors,” but not measurement error. In this article we discuss the concepts of reliability and measurement error in the context of dynamic (VAR(1)) models, and the consequences of disregarding measurement error variance in the data. For this purpose, we present a preliminary model that accounts for measurement error for constructs that are measured with a single indicator. We further discuss how this model could be used to investigate the between-person reliability of the measurements, as well as the (person-specific) within-person reliabilities and any individual differences in these reliabilities. We illustrate the consequences of assuming perfect reliability, the preliminary model, and reliabilities, using an empirical application in which we relate women’s general positive affect to their positive affect concerning their romantic relationship.

KW - DYNAMICS

KW - INERTIA

KW - autoregressive modeling

KW - intensive longitudinal data

KW - measurement error

KW - reliability

KW - time series analysis

U2 - 10.1037/met0000188

DO - 10.1037/met0000188

M3 - Article

VL - 24

SP - 70

EP - 91

JO - Psychological Methods

JF - Psychological Methods

SN - 1082-989X

IS - 1

ER -