Highlights• learning is often multidimensional, heterogeneous, and discontinuous• traditional statistical analyses are limited in capturing this complexity• latent class and latent profile models identify subgroups of learners• latent transition models characterize discontinuous, non-linear, learning paths• these models contribute to our understanding of learning and individual differences 3 Informative Tools for Characterizing Individual Differences in Learning: Latent Class, Latent Profile, and Latent Transition AnalysisThis article gives an introduction to latent class, latent profile, and latent transition models for researchers interested in investigating individual differences in learning and development. The models allow analyzing how the observed heterogeneity in a group (e.g., individual differences in conceptual knowledge) can be traced back to underlying homogeneous subgroups (e.g., learners differing systematically in their developmental phases). The estimated parameters include a characteristic response pattern for each subgroup, and, in the case of longitudinal data, the probabilities of transitioning from one subgroup to another over time. This article describes the steps involved in using the models, gives practical examples, and discusses limitations and extensions. Overall, the models help to characterize heterogeneous learner populations, multidimensional learning outcomes, nonlinear learning pathways, and changing relations between learning processes. The application of these models can therefore make a substantial contribution to our understanding of learning and individual differences.

Highlights• learning is often multidimensional, heterogeneous, and discontinuous• traditional statistical analyses are limited in capturing this complexity• latent class and latent profile models identify subgroups of learners• latent transition models characterize discontinuous, non-linear, learning paths• these models contribute to our understanding of learning and individual differences 3 Informative Tools for Characterizing Individual Differences in Learning: Latent Class, Latent Profile, and Latent Transition AnalysisThis article gives an introduction to latent class, latent profile, and latent transition models for researchers interested in investigating individual differences in learning and development. The models allow analyzing how the observed heterogeneity in a group (e.g., individual differences in conceptual knowledge) can be traced back to underlying homogeneous subgroups (e.g., learners differing systematically in their developmental phases). The estimated parameters include a characteristic response pattern for each subgroup, and, in the case of longitudinal data, the probabilities of transitioning from one subgroup to another over time. This article describes the steps involved in using the models, gives practical examples, and discusses limitations and extensions. Overall, the models help to characterize heterogeneous learner populations, multidimensional learning outcomes, nonlinear learning pathways, and changing relations between learning processes. The application of these models can therefore make a substantial contribution to our understanding of learning and individual differences.

No abstract

Little research has examined whether the relationship between working memory (WM) and anxiety/worry remains stable or changes over time; and, if changes occur, the factor(s) influencing change. Claims about influence are typically inferred from data collected at a single time point, and may misrepresent the nature of influence. To investigate the iterative influence of WM and Worry and/or vice versa, 133 fourteen-year-olds completed WM and Worry measures several times over the course of a single day as they prepared for a math test. We used a bivariate latent difference score model to analyse possible changes in WM-Worry relationships. The best fitting model indicated high Worry predicts decreases in WM, and low or decreased WM predicts increases in Worry; high WM with low Worry predicts accurate problem solving; low WM with high Worry predicts inaccurate problem solving. Findings show relationships between WM and Worry varies considerably over a single day, and initial disadvantages become worse over time.

No abstract