On the confounds among retest gains and age-cohort differences in the estimation of within-person change in longitudinal studies

A simulation study

Lesa R Hoffman, Scott M. Hofer, Martin J. Sliwinski

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

36 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Although longitudinal designs are the only way in which age changes can be directly observed, a recurrent criticism involves to what extent retest effects may downwardly bias estimates of true age-related cognitive change. Considerable attention has been given to the problem of retest effects within mixed effects models that include separate parameters for longitudinal change over time (usually specified as a function of age) and for the impact of retest (specified as a function of number of exposures). Because time (i.e., intervals between assessment) and number of exposures are highly correlated (and are perfectly correlated in equal interval designs) in most longitudinal studies, the separation of effects of within-person change from effects of retest gains is only possible given certain assumptions (e.g., age convergence). To the extent that cross-sectional and longitudinal effects of age differ, obtained estimates of aging and retest may not be informative. The current simulation study investigated the recovery of within-person change (i.e., aging) and retest effects from repeated cognitive testing as a function of number of waves, age range at baseline, and size and direction of age-cohort differences on the intercept and age slope in age-based models of change. Significant bias and Type I error rates in the estimated effects of retest were observed when these convergence assumptions were not met. These simulation results suggest that retest effects may not be distinguishable from effects of aging-related change and age-cohort differences in typical long-term traditional longitudinal designs.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)778-791
Number of pages14
JournalPsychology and aging
Volume26
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2011

Fingerprint

Longitudinal Studies
Direction compound

Keywords

  • Longitudinal models
  • Practice effects
  • Retest effects

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Aging
  • Geriatrics and Gerontology
  • Social Psychology

Cite this

On the confounds among retest gains and age-cohort differences in the estimation of within-person change in longitudinal studies : A simulation study. / Hoffman, Lesa R; Hofer, Scott M.; Sliwinski, Martin J.

In: Psychology and aging, Vol. 26, No. 4, 01.12.2011, p. 778-791.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{2d0de7cca44c472fb3600b0cb9c99b69,
title = "On the confounds among retest gains and age-cohort differences in the estimation of within-person change in longitudinal studies: A simulation study",
abstract = "Although longitudinal designs are the only way in which age changes can be directly observed, a recurrent criticism involves to what extent retest effects may downwardly bias estimates of true age-related cognitive change. Considerable attention has been given to the problem of retest effects within mixed effects models that include separate parameters for longitudinal change over time (usually specified as a function of age) and for the impact of retest (specified as a function of number of exposures). Because time (i.e., intervals between assessment) and number of exposures are highly correlated (and are perfectly correlated in equal interval designs) in most longitudinal studies, the separation of effects of within-person change from effects of retest gains is only possible given certain assumptions (e.g., age convergence). To the extent that cross-sectional and longitudinal effects of age differ, obtained estimates of aging and retest may not be informative. The current simulation study investigated the recovery of within-person change (i.e., aging) and retest effects from repeated cognitive testing as a function of number of waves, age range at baseline, and size and direction of age-cohort differences on the intercept and age slope in age-based models of change. Significant bias and Type I error rates in the estimated effects of retest were observed when these convergence assumptions were not met. These simulation results suggest that retest effects may not be distinguishable from effects of aging-related change and age-cohort differences in typical long-term traditional longitudinal designs.",
keywords = "Longitudinal models, Practice effects, Retest effects",
author = "Hoffman, {Lesa R} and Hofer, {Scott M.} and Sliwinski, {Martin J.}",
year = "2011",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1037/a0023910",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "26",
pages = "778--791",
journal = "Psychology and Aging",
issn = "0882-7974",
publisher = "American Psychological Association Inc.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - On the confounds among retest gains and age-cohort differences in the estimation of within-person change in longitudinal studies

T2 - A simulation study

AU - Hoffman, Lesa R

AU - Hofer, Scott M.

AU - Sliwinski, Martin J.

PY - 2011/12/1

Y1 - 2011/12/1

N2 - Although longitudinal designs are the only way in which age changes can be directly observed, a recurrent criticism involves to what extent retest effects may downwardly bias estimates of true age-related cognitive change. Considerable attention has been given to the problem of retest effects within mixed effects models that include separate parameters for longitudinal change over time (usually specified as a function of age) and for the impact of retest (specified as a function of number of exposures). Because time (i.e., intervals between assessment) and number of exposures are highly correlated (and are perfectly correlated in equal interval designs) in most longitudinal studies, the separation of effects of within-person change from effects of retest gains is only possible given certain assumptions (e.g., age convergence). To the extent that cross-sectional and longitudinal effects of age differ, obtained estimates of aging and retest may not be informative. The current simulation study investigated the recovery of within-person change (i.e., aging) and retest effects from repeated cognitive testing as a function of number of waves, age range at baseline, and size and direction of age-cohort differences on the intercept and age slope in age-based models of change. Significant bias and Type I error rates in the estimated effects of retest were observed when these convergence assumptions were not met. These simulation results suggest that retest effects may not be distinguishable from effects of aging-related change and age-cohort differences in typical long-term traditional longitudinal designs.

AB - Although longitudinal designs are the only way in which age changes can be directly observed, a recurrent criticism involves to what extent retest effects may downwardly bias estimates of true age-related cognitive change. Considerable attention has been given to the problem of retest effects within mixed effects models that include separate parameters for longitudinal change over time (usually specified as a function of age) and for the impact of retest (specified as a function of number of exposures). Because time (i.e., intervals between assessment) and number of exposures are highly correlated (and are perfectly correlated in equal interval designs) in most longitudinal studies, the separation of effects of within-person change from effects of retest gains is only possible given certain assumptions (e.g., age convergence). To the extent that cross-sectional and longitudinal effects of age differ, obtained estimates of aging and retest may not be informative. The current simulation study investigated the recovery of within-person change (i.e., aging) and retest effects from repeated cognitive testing as a function of number of waves, age range at baseline, and size and direction of age-cohort differences on the intercept and age slope in age-based models of change. Significant bias and Type I error rates in the estimated effects of retest were observed when these convergence assumptions were not met. These simulation results suggest that retest effects may not be distinguishable from effects of aging-related change and age-cohort differences in typical long-term traditional longitudinal designs.

KW - Longitudinal models

KW - Practice effects

KW - Retest effects

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=82955190528&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=82955190528&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1037/a0023910

DO - 10.1037/a0023910

M3 - Article

VL - 26

SP - 778

EP - 791

JO - Psychology and Aging

JF - Psychology and Aging

SN - 0882-7974

IS - 4

ER -