Dealing With Dependent Effect Sizes in MASEM

Stolwijk, Isidora; Jak, Suzanne; Eichelsheim, Veroni I.; Hoeve, Machteld

doi:10.1027/2151-2604/a000485

Cited by 5 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 152 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We used a multilevel MASEM approach (Wilson et al, 2016) to examine whether stress generation mediates the chronicity of symptoms of psychopathology over time. This approach is the gold standard method for accounting for dependencies among effect sizes extracted from the same studies when modeling structural paths, including indirect effects (Stolwijk et al, 2022). Specifically, we used a two-stage approach in which a random-effects no-intercept three-level model was first estimated to provide a pooled correlation matrix, which the hypothesized correlation model was fit to in Stage 2.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…By enabling us to retain all desired effect sizes, we were also able to examine broad categories such as overall psychopathology, internalizing, and externalizing, which necessitated the inclusion of sometimes several effect sizes from a given study. Finally, the use of a three-level, two-stage MASEM incorporated benefits of multilevel modeling while also employing the state-of-the-art two-stage MASEM approach (Wilson et al, 2016), which together have recently been recommended as the gold standard method for handling effect size dependencies in a MASEM context (Jak & Cheung, 2020; Stolwijk et al, 2022). Finally, we integrated multiple tests for publication bias, including new approaches that specifically handle dependent effect sizes (Rodgers & Pustejovsky, 2020).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This model provides a pooled correlation matrix. In Stage 2, the hypothesized model was fitted to the pooled correlation matrix using weighted least squares (WLS) estimation (Stolwijk et al, 2022), as required for MASEM (M. W.-L. Cheung & Chan, 2005; Jak, 2015; Stolwijk et al, 2022; Wilson et al, 2016), and the indirect effects of dependent and independent stress on the association of Time 1 with Time 2 psychopathology were estimated.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The vicious cycle of psychopathology and stressful life events: A meta-analytic review testing the stress generation model.

Rnic¹,

Santee²,

Hoffmeister³

et al. 2023

Psychological Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Stress generation theory initially posited that depression elevates risk for some stressful events (i.e., dependent events) but not others (i.e., independent events). This preregistered meta-analytic review examined whether stress generation occurs transdiagnostically by examining 95 longitudinal studies with 38,228 participants (537 total effect sizes) from over 30 years of research. Our multilevel metaanalyses found evidence of stress generation across a broad range of psychopathology, as evidenced by significantly larger prospective effects for dependent (overall psychopathology: r = .23) than independent (overall psychopathology: r = .10) stress. We also identified unique patterns of effects across specific types of psychopathology. For example, effects were larger for depression than anxiety. Furthermore, effects were sometimes larger in studies with younger participants, shorter time lags between assessments, checklist measures of stress, and for interpersonal stressors. Finally, a multilevel meta-analytic structural equation model suggested that dependent stress exacerbates psychopathology symptoms over time (β = .04), possibly contributing to chronicity. Interventions targeting the prevention of stress generation may mitigate chronic psychopathology. Conclusions of this study are limited by the predominance of depression effect sizes in the literature and our review of only English language articles. On the other hand, the findings are strengthened by rigorous inclusion criteria, lack of publication bias, and absence of moderating effects by publication year. The latter underscores the replicability of the stress generation effect over the last 30 years. Taken together, the review provides robust evidence that stress generation is a cross-diagnostic phenomenon that contributes to a vicious cycle of increasing stress and psychopathology. Public Significance StatementStress generation theory originally showed that people with depression can create their own stress. This meta-analysis indicates that stress generation is a cross-diagnostic phenomenon that contributes to the chronicity of symptoms of psychopathology. Findings imply that interventions aimed at preventing stress generation may mitigate chronic psychopathology. Stress generation also varied in nuanced ways across various types of psychopathology, thereby indicating for whom and under what conditions stress generation is most prominent. Importantly, a lack of publication bias and absence of moderating effects by publication year and by most demographic variables underscores the replicability of the stress generation effect over time and its universality across groups.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The vicious cycle of psychopathology and stressful life events: A meta-analytic review testing the stress generation model.

Rnic¹,

Santee²,

Hoffmeister³

et al. 2023

Psychological Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In Stage 1 of TSSEM, we conducted a random-effects meta-analysis with maximum likelihood estimation using a three-level approach to account for the correlation matrices nested within the same data set (Wilson et al, 2016); given that correlation matrices based on subsets of the same data set are more similar compared to correlation matrices from other data sets. A multilevel approach in Stage 1 of TSSEM is recommended when dependencies are present in the data (Stolwijk et al, 2022). In Stage 2 of TSSEM, we fit our MASEM model to the pooled correlation matrix.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“More is better” or “better near the middle”? A U.S.-based individual participant data meta-analysis of socioeconomic status and depressive symptoms.

Korous¹,

Causadías²,

Bradley³

et al. 2023

American Psychologist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Socioeconomic status (SES) is a widely researched construct in developmental science, yet less is known concerning relations between SES and adaptive behavior. Specifically, is the relation linear, with higher SES associated with better outcomes, or does the direction of association change at different levels of SES? Our aim was to examine linear (“more is better”) and quadratic (“better near the middle”) associations between components of SES (i.e., income, years of education, occupational status/prestige) and depressive symptoms (Center for Epidemiologic Studies–Depression Scale), and to explore moderation by developmental period (adolescence, young, middle, and older adulthood), gender/sex (female, male), and race/ethnicity (Asian American, Black, Latinx, multiracial, Native American, White). We hypothesized that there would be more support for a model containing quadratic associations. We conducted a two-stage meta-analytic structural equation model of 60 data sets (27,242 correlations, 498,179 participants) within the United States, accounting for dependencies between correlations, which were identified via the Interuniversity Consortium for Political and Social Research and handled using a two-step approach. Income was quadratically associated with depressive symptoms, but the quadratic model did not explain more variance in depressive symptoms than the linear model. Developmental period and race/ethnicity moderated the associations: Income was quadratically associated with depressive symptoms among middle-aged adults, and years of education were quadratically associated with depressive symptoms among White samples. Our findings suggest that researchers and clinical practitioners should consider the elevated risk of depressive symptoms for individuals from low and high-income backgrounds in the United States.

show abstract

“…As articles reported multiple studies with multiple samples, our data had a nested structure. We considered this dependency by following the WPL approach (Stolwijk et al, 2022;Van den Noortgate et al, 2013;Wilson et al, 2016). Using this approach, we first estimated the synthesized correlation matrix using a three-level hierarchical model.…”

Section: Analytic Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Relation Between Perceived Mental Effort, Monitoring Judgments, and Learning Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis

David,

Biwer,

Baars

et al. 2024

Educ Psychol Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accurately monitoring one’s learning processes during self-regulated learning depends on using the right cues, one of which could be perceived mental effort. A meta-analysis by Baars et al. (2020) found a negative association between mental effort and monitoring judgments (r = -.35), suggesting that the amount of mental effort experienced during a learning task is usually negatively correlated with learners’ perception of learning. However, it is unclear how monitoring judgments and perceptions of mental effort relate to learning outcomes. To examine if perceived mental effort is a diagnostic cue for learning outcomes, and whether monitoring judgments mediate this relationship, we employed a meta-analytic structural equation model. Results indicated a negative, moderate association between perceived mental effort and monitoring judgments (β = -.19), a positive, large association between monitoring judgments and learning outcomes (β = .29), and a negative, moderate indirect association between perceived mental effort and learning outcomes (β = -.05), which was mediated by monitoring judgments. Our subgroup analysis did not reveal any significant differences across moderators potentially due to the limited number of studies included per moderator category. Findings suggest that when learners perceive higher levels of mental effort, they exhibit lower learning (confidence) judgments, which relates to lower actual learning outcomes. Thus, learners seem to use perceived mental effort as a cue to judge their learning while perceived mental effort only indirectly relates to actual learning outcomes.

show abstract

Dealing With Dependent Effect Sizes in MASEM

Cited by 5 publications

References 152 publications

The vicious cycle of psychopathology and stressful life events: A meta-analytic review testing the stress generation model.

The vicious cycle of psychopathology and stressful life events: A meta-analytic review testing the stress generation model.

“More is better” or “better near the middle”? A U.S.-based individual participant data meta-analysis of socioeconomic status and depressive symptoms.

The Relation Between Perceived Mental Effort, Monitoring Judgments, and Learning Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About