Comparing findings from the random-intercept cross-lagged panel model and the monozygotic twin difference cross-lagged panel model: Maladaptive parenting and offspring emotional and behavioural problems

Abstract

Background

In this study we compare results obtained when applying the monozygotic twin difference cross-lagged panel model (MZD-CLPM) and a random intercept cross-lagged panel model (RI-CLPM) to the same data. Each of these models is designed to strengthen researchers' ability to draw causal inference from cross-lagged associations. We explore differences and similarities in how each model does this, and in the results each model produces. Specifically, we examine associations between maladaptive parenting and child emotional and behavioural problems in identical twins aged 9, 12 and 16.

Method

Child reports of 5698 identical twins from the Twins Early Development Study (TEDS) were analysed. We ran a regular CLPM to anchor our findings within the current literature, then applied the MZD-CLPM and the RI-CLPM.

Results

The RI-CLPM and MZD-CLPM each enable researchers to evaluate the direction of effects between correlated variables, after accounting for unmeasured sources of potential confounding. Our interpretation of these models therefore focusses primarily on the magnitude and significance of cross-lagged associations. In both the MZD-CLPM and the RI-CLPM behavioural problems at age 9 resulted in higher levels of maladaptive parenting at age 12. Other effects were not consistently significant across the two models, although the majority of estimates pointed in the same direction.

Conclusion

In light of the triangulated methods, differences in the results obtained using the MZD-CLPM and the RI-CLPM underline the importance of careful consideration of what sources of unmeasured confounding different models control for and that nuance is required when interpreting findings using such models. We provide an overview of what the CLPM, RI-CLPM and MZD-CLPM can and cannot control for in this respect and the conclusions that can be drawn from each model.