Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39187739›Full record

ArticleBehavior research methods2024

Interactions between latent variables in count regression models.

Christoph Kiefer, Sarah Wilker, Axel Mayer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Behavior research methods, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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.

Christoph KieferMethods and Evaluation, Department of Psychology, Bielefeld University, Universitätsstraße 25, D-33501, Bielefeld, Germany. christoph.kiefer@uni-bielefeld.de.ORCID 0000-0002-9166-400X
Sarah WilkerClinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Department of Psychology, Bielefeld University, Universitätsstraße 25, D-33501, Bielefeld, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-0887-4672
Axel MayerMethods and Evaluation, Department of Psychology, Bielefeld University, Universitätsstraße 25, D-33501, Bielefeld, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-9716-878X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In psychology and the social sciences, researchers often model count outcome variables accounting for latent predictors and their interactions. Even though neglecting measurement error in such count regression models (e.g., Poisson or negative binomial regression) can have unfavorable consequences like attenuation bias, such analyses are often carried out in the generalized linear model (GLM) framework using fallible covariates such as sum scores. An alternative is count regression models based on structural equation modeling, which allow to specify latent covariates and thereby account for measurement error. However, the issue of how and when to include interactions between latent covariates or between latent and manifest covariates is rarely discussed for count regression models. In this paper, we present a latent variable count regression model (LV-CRM) allowing for latent covariates as well as interactions among both latent and manifest covariates. We conducted three simulation studies, investigating the estimation accuracy of the LV-CRM and comparing it to GLM-based count regression models. Interestingly, we found that even in scenarios with high reliabilities, the regression coefficients from a GLM-based model can be severely biased. In contrast, even for moderate sample sizes, the LV-CRM provided virtually unbiased regression coefficients. Additionally, statistical inferences yielded mixed results for the GLM-based models (i.e., low coverage rates, but acceptable empirical detection rates), but were generally acceptable using the LV-CRM. We provide an applied example from clinical psychology illustrating how the LV-CRM framework can be used to model count regressions with latent interactions.

Indexed as

Models, StatisticalComputer SimulationData Interpretation, StatisticalHumansLinear ModelsRegression AnalysisCount outcomesLatent interactionsPoisson regression

Identifiers

PMID39187739
PMCPMC11525413

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.