ArticleBehavior research methods2026
Why the binary latent growth model is not a special case of the ordinal latent growth model: Theoretical arguments and empirical evidence.
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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In the structural equation modeling framework, binary variable models are generally considered a special case of ordinal variable models, as both involve similar scale assignment processes. However, the scaling processes of the two model types differ, with these differences becoming increasingly pronounced in the context of latent growth models (LGMs). To define scale units, the two types of LGMs-specifically, one with ordinal variables and the other with binary variables-depend on different observed scale references, such as thresholds and standard deviations, which are derived from observed categorical variables. Applying distinct observed scale references to binary and ordinal LGMs results in systematic differences in the scale units of their corresponding latent response variables. Consequently, in binary LGMs, the transformed latent response variables used for model estimation may fail to accurately reflect the corresponding population information, and as a result, their parameter estimates are more likely to be systematically biased than those obtained from ordinal LGMs. This study investigates the impact of these differences on estimating ordinal and binary LGMs and underscores potential estimation concerns in binary LGMs from both theoretical and empirical perspectives.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.