Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35604748›Full record

ArticleJournal of consulting and clinical psychology2022

How to model and interpret cross-lagged effects in psychotherapy mechanisms of change research: A comparison of multilevel and structural equation models.

Fredrik Falkenström, Nili Solomonov, Julian A Rubel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of consulting and clinical psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Targeting mechanisms of change as a path to precision psychotherapy for community settings.Psychotherapy research : journal of the Society for Psychotherapy Research · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Mechanisms of Change in Exposure Therapy for Anxiety and Related Disorders: A Research Agenda.Clinical psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science · 2025
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Fredrik FalkenströmDepartment of Psychology.ORCID 0000-0002-2486-6859
Nili SolomonovDepartment of Psychiatry.ORCID 0000-0003-1573-5715
Julian A RubelDepartment of Psychology.ORCID 0000-0002-9625-6611

Funding

Clinical and Translational Science AwardUL1TR001873 · NCATS · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI REILLY, MUREDACH P · 2016 to 2025
$99.0M
Disparities in COVID Disease Severity and Outcomes in New York CityUL1TR002384 · NCATS · WEILL MEDICAL COLL OF CORNELL UNIV · PI JULIANNE L IMPERATO-MCGINLEY · 2017 to 2026
$86.2M
Positive valence systems engagement during social reward exposure psychotherapy for mid- and late-life depressionK23MH123864 · NIMH · WEILL MEDICAL COLL OF CORNELL UNIV · PI SOLOMONOV, NILI · 2020 to 2024
$954k
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001873NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002384NIMH NIH HHS K23 MH123864
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveModeling cross-lagged effects in psychotherapy mechanisms of change studies is complex and requires careful attention to model selection and interpretation. However, there is a lack of field-specific guidelines. We aimed to (a) describe the estimation and interpretation of cross lagged effects using multilevel models (MLM) and random-intercept cross lagged panel model (RI-CLPM); (b) compare these models' performance and risk of bias using simulations and an applied research example to formulate recommendations for practice.

methodPart 1 is a tutorial focused on introducing/describing dynamic effects in the form of autoregression and bidirectionality. In Part 2, we compare the estimation of cross-lagged effects in RI-CLPM, which takes dynamic effects into account, with three commonly used MLMs that cannot accommodate dynamics. In Part 3, we describe a Monte Carlo simulation study testing model performance of RI-CLPM and MLM under realistic conditions for psychotherapy mechanisms of change studies.

resultsOur findings suggested that all three MLMs resulted in severely biased estimates of cross-lagged effects when dynamic effects were present in the data, with some experimental conditions generating statistically significant estimates in the wrong direction. MLMs performed comparably well only in conditions which are conceptually unrealistic for psychotherapy mechanisms of change research (i.e., no inertia in variables and no bidirectional effects). DISCUSSION: Based on conceptual fit and our simulation results, we strongly recommend using fully dynamic structural equation modeling models, such as the RI-CLPM, rather than static, unidirectional regression models (e.g., MLM) to study cross-lagged effects in mechanisms of change research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Indexed as

PsychotherapyComputer SimulationHumansMonte Carlo MethodMultilevel Analysis

Identifiers

PMID35604748
PMCPMC9245087

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.