{"title":"Time-lagged panel models in psychotherapy process and mechanisms of change research: Methodological challenges and advances","authors":"Fredrik Falkenström","doi":"10.1016/j.cpr.2024.102435","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In recent years, there has been increasing interest in utilizing time-lagged panel models to study mechanisms of change in psychotherapy. These models offer valuable insights into the dynamic relationships between variables over time and offer stronger causal inference capabilities than cross-sectional analyses. Therefore, they are well-suited for modeling the intricate relationships between mechanisms of change and outcomes in psychotherapy studies, which are typically beyond experimental control. However, their complexity, coupled with the fact that detailed explanations are often embedded in dense statistical or econometric texts, poses challenges. This paper provides a background on cross-lagged panel models and delves deeper into explaining the issues of 1) dynamic panel bias, 2) long-run effects, and 3) testing whether different treatments work by different mechanisms. Using data from a psychotherapy study on treatment of adolescent depression, I demonstrate how these issues manifest in real data. In conclusion, I recommend using structural equation modeling to circumvent dynamic panel bias, reporting long-run effects to reveal the long-term impact of sustained therapeutic work on mechanisms of change, and carefully considering whether mediation, moderation, or a combination of both, best describes differential effects of mechanisms between treatments.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48458,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Psychology Review","volume":"110 ","pages":"Article 102435"},"PeriodicalIF":13.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272735824000564/pdfft?md5=d58d13529a3a79a69ed0e70ab5c231b4&pid=1-s2.0-S0272735824000564-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272735824000564","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In recent years, there has been increasing interest in utilizing time-lagged panel models to study mechanisms of change in psychotherapy. These models offer valuable insights into the dynamic relationships between variables over time and offer stronger causal inference capabilities than cross-sectional analyses. Therefore, they are well-suited for modeling the intricate relationships between mechanisms of change and outcomes in psychotherapy studies, which are typically beyond experimental control. However, their complexity, coupled with the fact that detailed explanations are often embedded in dense statistical or econometric texts, poses challenges. This paper provides a background on cross-lagged panel models and delves deeper into explaining the issues of 1) dynamic panel bias, 2) long-run effects, and 3) testing whether different treatments work by different mechanisms. Using data from a psychotherapy study on treatment of adolescent depression, I demonstrate how these issues manifest in real data. In conclusion, I recommend using structural equation modeling to circumvent dynamic panel bias, reporting long-run effects to reveal the long-term impact of sustained therapeutic work on mechanisms of change, and carefully considering whether mediation, moderation, or a combination of both, best describes differential effects of mechanisms between treatments.
期刊介绍:
Clinical Psychology Review serves as a platform for substantial reviews addressing pertinent topics in clinical psychology. Encompassing a spectrum of issues, from psychopathology to behavior therapy, cognition to cognitive therapies, behavioral medicine to community mental health, assessment, and child development, the journal seeks cutting-edge papers that significantly contribute to advancing the science and/or practice of clinical psychology.
While maintaining a primary focus on topics directly related to clinical psychology, the journal occasionally features reviews on psychophysiology, learning therapy, experimental psychopathology, and social psychology, provided they demonstrate a clear connection to research or practice in clinical psychology. Integrative literature reviews and summaries of innovative ongoing clinical research programs find a place within its pages. However, reports on individual research studies and theoretical treatises or clinical guides lacking an empirical base are deemed inappropriate for publication.