TY - JOUR
T1 - Do different methods for modeling age-graded trajectories yield consistent and valid results?
AU - Warren, John Robert
AU - Luo, Liying
AU - Halpern-Manners, Andrew
AU - Raymo, James M.
AU - Palloni, Alberto
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2015 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved.
PY - 2015/7/14
Y1 - 2015/7/14
N2 - Data on age-sequenced trajectories of individuals’ attributes are used for a growing number of research purposes. However, there is no consensus about which method to use to identify the number of discrete trajectories in a population or to assign individuals to a specific trajectory group. The authors modeled real and simulated trajectory data using “naïve” methods, optimal matching, grade of membership models, and three types of finite-mixture models. They found that these methods produced inferences about the number of trajectories that frequently differ (1) fromone another and (2) fromthe truth as represented by simulation parameters. They also found that they differed in the assignment of individuals to trajectory groups. In light of these findings, the authors argue that researchers should interpret results based on these methods cautiously, neither reifying point estimates about the number of trajectories nor treating individuals’ trajectory group assignments as certain.
AB - Data on age-sequenced trajectories of individuals’ attributes are used for a growing number of research purposes. However, there is no consensus about which method to use to identify the number of discrete trajectories in a population or to assign individuals to a specific trajectory group. The authors modeled real and simulated trajectory data using “naïve” methods, optimal matching, grade of membership models, and three types of finite-mixture models. They found that these methods produced inferences about the number of trajectories that frequently differ (1) fromone another and (2) fromthe truth as represented by simulation parameters. They also found that they differed in the assignment of individuals to trajectory groups. In light of these findings, the authors argue that researchers should interpret results based on these methods cautiously, neither reifying point estimates about the number of trajectories nor treating individuals’ trajectory group assignments as certain.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84936993308&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84936993308&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1086/681962
DO - 10.1086/681962
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84936993308
SN - 0002-9602
VL - 120
SP - 1809
JO - American Journal of Sociology
JF - American Journal of Sociology
IS - 6
ER -