ArticleBehavior research methods2026
Dynamic measurement invariance cutoffs for longitudinal and dyadic data.
Article in Behavior research methods, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Measurement invariance is a common interest in behavioral research to ensure that scores are comparable across groups or time. Evidence for measurement invariance is traditionally evaluated by comparing fit index differences between constrained and unconstrained models to cutoffs like ΔCFI > - 0.01. However, traditional fit index difference cutoffs have been noted to have limited generalizability and potentially poor performance outside of conditions used to derive cutoffs. Dynamic measurement invariance (DMI) cutoffs were proposed to address generalizability concerns by re-simulating cutoffs for each model so that the cutoffs are custom-tailored to the researcher's model and data characteristics. However, a notable limitation of the extant fit index difference cutoff literature is that only multiple-group factor models for two-group comparisons have been considered. These models are appropriate for evaluating invariance of independent groups (e.g., demographic characteristics, countries, languages), but they cannot accommodate dependent groups with correlated responses across groups. Common examples of dependent groups include longitudinal data (i.e., groups are timepoints) or dyadic data (e.g., romantic partners, parents, and children). In such cases, models outside the multiple-group framework that incorporate between-group correlations are needed to evaluate invariance, but there is currently no guidance for interpreting fit index difference cutoffs in these models. Therefore, this paper proposes extending DMI cutoffs for dependent groups (DG-DMI). After describing the method, three empirical examples are provided to show how DG-DMI can inform conclusions about dyadic or longitudinal measurement invariance (including data with three or more timepoints). Open-source software is provided to facilitate the application of the method.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41826739What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.