TY - JOUR
T1 - The Vuong-Lo-Mendell-Rubin Test for latent class and latent profile analysis
T2 - A note on the different implementations in Mplus and LatentGOLD
AU - Vermunt, J.K.
PY - 2024
Y1 - 2024
N2 - Mplus and LatentGOLD implement the Vuong-Lo-Mendell-Rubin test (comparing models with K and K + 1 latent classes) in slightly differ manners. While LatentGOLD uses the formulae from Vuong (1989; https://doi.org/10.2307/1912557), Mplus replaces the standard parameter variancecovariance matrix by its robust version. Our small simulation study showed why such a seemingly small difference may sometimes yield rather different results. The main finding is that the Mplus approximation of the distribution of the likelihood -ratio statistic is much more data dependent than the LatentGOLD one. This data dependency is stronger when the true model serves as the null hypothesis (H0) with K classes than when it serves as the alternative hypothesis (H1) with K + 1 classes, and it is also stronger for low class separation than for high class separation. Another important finding is that neither of the two implementations yield uniformly distributed p -values under the correct null hypothesis, indicating this test is not the best model selection tool in mixture modeling.
AB - Mplus and LatentGOLD implement the Vuong-Lo-Mendell-Rubin test (comparing models with K and K + 1 latent classes) in slightly differ manners. While LatentGOLD uses the formulae from Vuong (1989; https://doi.org/10.2307/1912557), Mplus replaces the standard parameter variancecovariance matrix by its robust version. Our small simulation study showed why such a seemingly small difference may sometimes yield rather different results. The main finding is that the Mplus approximation of the distribution of the likelihood -ratio statistic is much more data dependent than the LatentGOLD one. This data dependency is stronger when the true model serves as the null hypothesis (H0) with K classes than when it serves as the alternative hypothesis (H1) with K + 1 classes, and it is also stronger for low class separation than for high class separation. Another important finding is that neither of the two implementations yield uniformly distributed p -values under the correct null hypothesis, indicating this test is not the best model selection tool in mixture modeling.
KW - VLMR test
KW - Class enumeration
KW - Likelihood-ratio test
KW - Mixture modeling
KW - Nested models
UR - https://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=wosstart_imp_pure20230417&SrcAuth=WosAPI&KeyUT=WOS:001262625300004&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=WOS_CPL
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85189071657
U2 - 10.5964/meth.12467
DO - 10.5964/meth.12467
M3 - Article
SN - 1614-1881
VL - 20
SP - 72
EP - 83
JO - Methodology: European Journal of Research Methods for the Behavioral and Social Sciences
JF - Methodology: European Journal of Research Methods for the Behavioral and Social Sciences
IS - 1
ER -