Abstract
Abstract. In repeated cross-sections of organizations, different individuals are sampled from the same set of organizations at each time point of measurement. As a result, common longitudinal data analysis methods (e.g., latent growth curve models) cannot be applied in the usual way. In this contribution, a multilevel structural equation modeling approach to analyze data from repeated cross-sections is presented. Results from a simulation study are reported which aimed at obtaining guidelines on appropriate sample sizes. We focused on a situation where linear growth occurs at the organizational level, and organizational growth is predicted by a single organizational level variable. The power to identify an effect of this organizational level variable was moderately to strongly positively related to number of measurement occasions, number of groups, group size, intraclass correlation, effect size, and growth curve reliability. The Type I error rate was close to the nominal alpha level under all conditions.
References
2000).
(Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis . In S. W. J. KozlowskiK. J. KleinEds., Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions (pp. 349–381). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.2006). Latent curve models: A structural equation perspective. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
(1978). Robustness? British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 31, 144–152. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8317.1978.tb00581.x
(1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
(2010). Explaining stability and changes in school effectiveness by looking at changes in the functioning of school factors. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 21, 409–427. doi: 10.1080/09243453.2010.512795
(1985). Panel data from time series of cross-sections. Journal of Econometrics, 30, 109–126. doi: 10.1016/0304-4076(85)90134-4
(2000). Design and analysis of cluster randomization trials in health research. London, UK: Arnold.
(1998). A comparison of model-and multiple imputation-based approaches to longitudinal analyses with partial missingness. Structural Equation Modeling, 5, 1–21. doi: 10.1080/10705519809540086
(2003). Power of latent growth modeling for detecting group differences in linear growth trajectory parameters. Structural Equation Modeling, 10, 380–400. doi: 10.1207/S15328007SEM1003_3
(2005). Power of latent growth modeling for detecting linear growth: Number of measurements and comparison with other analytic approaches. The Journal of Experimental Education, 73, 121–139. doi: 10.3200/JEXE.73.2.121-139
(1994). Cohort versus cross-sectional design in large field trials: Precision, sample size, and a unifying model. Statistics in Medicine, 13, 61–78. doi: 10.1002/sim.4780130108
(1992). A standard international socio-economic index of occupational status. Social Science Research, 21, 1–56. doi: 10.1016/0049-089X(92)90017-B
(2014). mvtnorm: Multivariate Normal and t Distributions. R package version 1.0-0. Retrieved from http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=mvtnorm
(1995). A multi-level analysis of school improvement: Changes in schools’ performance over time. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 6, 97–114. doi: 10.1080/0924345950060201
(1996). The effect of school resources on student achievement. Review of Educational Research, 66, 361–396. doi: 10.3102/00346543066003361
(2007). Intraclass correlation values for planning group-randomized trials in education. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 29, 60–87. doi: 10.3102/0162373707299706
(2006). On the power of multivariate latent growth curve models to detect correlated change. Psychological Methods, 11, 244–252. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.11.3.244
(2008). Evaluating the power of latent growth curve models to detect individual differences in change. Structural Equation Modeling, 15, 541–563. doi: 10.1080/10705510802338983
(2015). Cluster randomised trials with repeated cross sections: Alternatives to parallel group designs. British Medical Journal, 350, h2925. doi: 10.1136/bmj.h2925
(2001). The accuracy of multilevel structural equation modeling with pseudobalanced groups and small samples. Structural Equation Modeling, 8, 157–174. doi: 10.1207/S15328007SEM0802_1
(2010). The effect of estimation method and sample size in multilevel structural equation modeling. Statistica Neerlandica, 64, 157–170. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9574.2009.00445.x
(1995).
(Statistical power in structural equation modeling . In R. H. HoyleEd., Structural equation modeling. Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 100–117). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.1997). A didactic example of multilevel structural equation modeling applicable to the study of organizations. Structural Equation Modeling, 4, 1–24. doi: 10.1080/10705519709540056
(2010). Power analysis in two-level unbalanced designs. Journal of Experimental Education, 78, 291–317. doi: 10.1080/00220970903292876
(2009). The accuracy of significance tests for slope variance components in multilevel random coefficient models. Organizational Research Methods, 12, 418–435. doi: 10.1177/1094428107308984
(2013). Sample size limits for estimating upper level mediation models using multilevel SEM. Structural Equation Modeling, 20, 241–264. doi: 10.1080/10705511.2013.769391
(2013). Longitudinal structural equation modeling. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
(2008). The multilevel latent covariate model: A new, more reliable approach to group-level effects in contextual studies. Psychological Methods, 13, 203–229. doi: 10.1037/a0012869
(2004). School disciplinary climate: Characteristics and effects on eighth grade achievement. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 50, 169–188.
(2005). Sufficient sample sizes for multilevel modeling. Methodology, 1, 85–91. doi: 10.1027/1614-2241.1.3.86
(2009). Latent variable modeling of differences and changes with longitudinal data. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 577–605. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163612
(2014). Longitudinal data analysis using structural equation models. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
(2016). The effect of small sample size on two-level model estimates: A review and illustration. Educational Psychology Review, 28, 295–314. doi: 10.1007/s10648-014-9287-x
(2005). People are variables too: Multilevel structural equations modeling. Psychological Methods, 10, 259–284. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.10.3.259
(1990). Latent curve analysis. Psychometrika, 55, 107–122. doi: 10.1007/BF02294746
(1991). Multilevel factor analysis of class and student achievement components. Journal of Educational Measurement, 28, 338–354. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-3984.1991.tb00363.x
(2011).
(Beyond multilevel regression modeling: Multilevel analysis in a general latent variable framework . In J. J. HoxJ. K. RobertsEds., Handbook of advanced multilevel analysis (pp. 15–40). New York, NY: Routledge.1997). General longitudinal modeling of individual differences in experimental designs: A latent variable framework for analysis and power estimation. Psychological Methods, 2, 371–402. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.2.4.371
(1998-2010). Mplus – Statistical analysis with latent variables [Computer software]. Muthén & Muthén: Los Angeles, CA.
(2002). How to use a Monte Carlo study to decide on sample size and determine power. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 599–620. doi: 10.1207/S15328007SEM0904_8
(2009). PISA 2006 technical report. Paris, France: OECD.
. (2015). Advances in mediation analysis: A survey and synthesis of new developments. Annual Review of Psychology, 66, 825–852. doi: 0.1146/annurev-psych-010814-015258
(2008). Latent growth curve modeling. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
(2013). R: A language and environment for statistical computing [Computer software]. R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0, URL http://www.R-project.org/
. (2014). Model fit evaluation in multilevel structural equation models. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 81. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00081
(2006). Career education: An application of latent growth curve modelling to career information-seeking behaviour of school pupils. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 141–153. doi: 10.1348/000709904x22386
(2004). Latent growth curve analyses of peer and parent influences on smoking progression among early adolescents. Health Psychology, 23, 612–621. doi: 10.1037/0278-6133.23.6.612
(2012). Computers as pedagogical tools in Brazil: A pseudo-panel analysis. Education Economics, 20, 19–32. doi: 10.1080/09645290903546496
(1997). Stability and consistency in secondary schools’ effects on students’ GCSE outcomes over three years. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 8, 169–197. doi: 10.1080/0924345970080201
(2001). Analysis of cluster randomized trials with repeated cross-sectional binary measurements. Statistics in Medicine, 20, 417–433. doi: 10.1002/1097-0258(20010215)20:3<417::AID-SIM802>3.0.CO;2-G
(2008).
(Pseudo-panels and repeated cross-sections . In L. MátyásP. SevestreEds., The econometrics of panel data (pp. 369–383). Berlin, Germany: Springer.1993). Minimum MSE estimation of a regression model with fixed effects from a series of cross-sections. Journal of Econometrics, 59, 125–136. doi: 10.1016/0304-4076(93)90042-4
(1989). A longitudinal hierarchical linear model for estimating school effects and their stability. Journal of Educational Measurement, 26, 209–232. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-3984.1989.tb00329.x
(