On the meaning of the latent variables in the CT-C(M-1) model: A comment on Maydeu-Olivares and Coffman (2006).

[Correction Notice: An erratum for this article was reported in Vol 13(2) of Psychological Methods (see record 2008-06808-007). In Figures 3B and 3D, the question marks (?) should read as multiplication signs (×). That is, it should read as β×λ?, β×λ?, and β×λ?? instead of β?λ?, β?λ?, and β?λ?? in Figure 3B and as γ×λ? and γ×λ? instead of γ?λ? and γ?λ? in Figure 3D.] In a recent article, A. Maydeu-Olivares and D. L. Coffman (2006; see record 2006-22258-002) presented a random intercept factor approach for modeling idiosyncratic response styles in questionnaire data and compared this approach with competing confirmatory factor analysis models. Among the competing models was the CT-C(M-1) model (M. Eid, 2000). In an application to the Life Orientation Test (M. F. Scheier & C. S. Carver, 1985), Maydeu-Olivares and Coffman found that results obtained from the CT-C(M-1) model were difficult to interpret. In particular, Maydeu-Olivares and Coffman challenged the asymmetry of the CT-C(M-1) model. In the present article, the authors show that the difficulties faced by Maydeu-Olivares and Coffman rest upon an improper interpretation of the meaning of the latent factors. The authors' aim is to clarify the meaning of the latent variables in the CT-C(M-1) model. The authors explain how to properly interpret the results from this model and introduce an alternative restricted model that is conceptually similar to the CT-C(M-1) model and nested within it. The fit of this model is invariant across different reference methods. Finally, the authors provide guidelines as to which model should be used in which research context. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Random intercept item factor analysis.

The common factor model assumes that the linear coefficients (intercepts and factor loadings) linking the observed variables to the latent factors are fixed coefficients (i.e., common for all participants). When the observed variables are participants' observed responses to stimuli, such as their responses to the items of a questionnaire, the assumption of common linear coefficients may be too restrictive. For instance, this may occur if participants consistently use the response scale idiosyncratically. To account for this phenomenon, the authors partially relax the fixed coefficients assumption by allowing the intercepts in the factor model to change across participants. The model is attractive when m factors are expected on the basis of substantive theory but m + 1 factors are needed in practice to adequately reproduce the data. Also, this model for single-level data can be fitted with conventional software for structural equation modeling. The authors demonstrate the use of this model with an empirical data set on optimism in which they compare it with competing models such as the bifactor and the correlated trait-correlated method minus 1 models. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Correction to Bartels et al. (2007).

Reports an error in "Twins and the study of rater (dis)agreement" by Meike Bartels, Dorret I. Boomsma, James J. Hudziak, Toos C. E. M. van Beijsterveldt and Edwin J. C. G. van den Oord (Psychological Methods, 2007[Dec], Vol 12[4], 451-466). The DOI for the supplemental materials was printed incorrectly. The correct DOI is as follows: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.12.4.451.supp. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2007-18729-006.) Genetically informative data can be used to address fundamental questions concerning the measurement of behavior in children. The authors illustrate this with longitudinal multiple-rater data on internalizing problems in twins. Valid information on the behavior of a child is obtained for behavior that multiple raters agree upon and for rater-specific perception of the child's behavior. Rater-disagreement variance =?2(rd) accounted for 35% of the individual differences in internalizing behavior. Up to 17% of this =?2(rd) was accounted for by rater-specific additive genetic variance=?2(Au). Thus, the disagreement should not be considered only to be bias/error but also as representing the unique feature of the relationships between that parent and the child. The longitudinal extension of this model helps to make a distinction between measurement error and the raters' unique perception of the child's behavior. For internalizing behavior, the results show large stability across time, which is accounted for by common additive genetic and common shared environmental factors. Rater-specific shared environmental factors show substantial influence on stability. This could mean that rater bias may be persistent and affect longitudinal studies. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Separating trait effects from trait-specific method effects in multitrait-multimethod models: A multiple-indicator CT-C(M-1) model.

An overview of several models of confirmatory factor analysis for analyzing multitrait-multimethod (MTMM) data and a discussion of their advantages and limitations are provided. A new class of multi-indicator MTMM models combines several strengths and avoids a number of serious shortcomings inherent in previously developed MTMM models. The new models enable researchers to specify and to test trait-specific-method effects. The trait and method concepts composing these models are explained in detail and are contrasted with those of previously developed MTMM models for multiple indicators. The definitions of the models are explained step by step, and a practical empirical application of the models to the measurement of 3 traits x 3 methods is used to demonstrate their advantages and limitations. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Correction to Mahoney et al. (2008).

Reports an error in "Content analysis of Consulting psychology journal: Practice and research (Volumes 44-59)" by Kevin T. Mahoney, Walter C. Buboltz Jr., Barlow Soper, Dennis Doverspike and Byron J. Simoneaux (Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 2008[Sep], Vol 60[3], 246-258). The title of the journal was printed incorrectly on page 257 as "Counseling Psychology Journal: Practice and Research." The correct title of the journal is Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2008-11542-002.) A content analysis of articles published in Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research was performed from 1992 (Vol. 44) through 2007 (Vol. 59). A total of 342 articles were categorized into 21 derived content categories and an "Other" category. Results show that the leading categories for publication were Coaching, Development and Training, and History of Consulting. The content was fairly stable over time. The journal does appear to be meeting its primary mission of disseminating information pertinent to the field of consulting psychology. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Correction to Forrest et al. (2008).

Reports an error in "Psychology trainees with competence problems: From individual to ecological conceptualizations" by Linda Forrest, Nancy S. Elman and David S. Shen Miller (Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 2008[Nov], Vol 2[4], 183-192). The order of authorship was printed incorrectly, both in the issue Table of Contents and in the article. The correct order of authorship for this article is: Linda Forrest, Nancy S. Elman, and David S. Shen Miller. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2008-17021-001.) Problems with professional competence or impairment in psychology have been viewed almost exclusively as residing within the individual trainee or psychologist, with limited attention to the contexts in which such difficulties are embedded. The authors propose an ecological perspective (Bronfenbrenner, 1979, 1989, 1995) to capture the influence of multiple factors that affect trainee development and provide a stronger base from which to conceptualize and address problems of professional competence. The authors describe Bronfenbrenner's ecological model and use it as a framework to understand professional competence problems, recommend best practices for prevention and intervention, and suggest future research directions. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Correction to Duncan et al. (2008).

Reports an error in "Goal neglect and Spearman's g: Competing parts of a complex task" by John Duncan, Alice Parr, Alexandra Woolgar, Russell Thompson, Peter Bright, Sally Cox, Sonia Bishop and Ian Nimmo-Smith (Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 2008[Feb], Vol 137[1], 131-148). The DOI for the supplemental materials was printed incorrectly. The correct DOI is as follows: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.137.1.131.supp (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2008-01081-009.) In goal neglect, a person ignores some task requirement though being able to describe it. Goal neglect is closely related to general intelligence or C. Spearman's (1904) g (J. Duncan, H. Emslie, P. Williams, R. Johnson, & C. Freer, 1996). The authors tested the role of task complexity in neglect and the hypothesis that different task components in some sense compete for attention. In contrast to many kinds of attentional limits, increasing the real-time demands of one task component does not promote neglect of another. Neither does neglect depend on preparation for different possible events in a block of trials. Instead, the key factor is complexity in the whole body of knowledge specified in task instructions. The authors suggest that as novel activity is constructed, relevant facts, rules, and requirements must be organized into a "task model." As this model increases in complexity, different task components compete for representation, and vulnerable components may be lost. Construction of effective task models is closely linked to g. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Correction to Piper et al. (2008).

Reports an error in "Refining the tobacco dependence phenotype using the Wisconsin Inventory of Smoking Dependence Motives" by Megan E. Piper, Daniel M. Bolt, Su-Young Kim, Sandra J. Japuntich, Stevens S. Smith, Jeff Niederdeppe, Dale S. Cannon and Timothy B. Baker (Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 2008[Nov], Vol 117[4], 747-761). In the article “Refining the Tobacco Dependence Phenotype Using the Wisconsin Inventory of Smoking Dependence Motives,” by Megan E. Piper, Daniel M. Bolt, Su-Young Kim, Sandra J. Japuntich, Stevens S. Smith, Jeff Niederdeppe, Dale S. Cannon, and Timothy B. Baker (Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 2008, Vol. 117, No. 4., pp. 747–761), the funding information was incomplete. The complete information is as follows: This research was conducted at the University of Wisconsin—Madison and was supported by Transdisciplinary Tobacco Use Research Center grants P50DA019706 from the National Institute on Drug Abuse and P50CA084724 from the National Cancer Institute. Stevens S. Smith was supported by National Cancer Institute grant 1R03CA126406, and Megan E. Piper was supported by an institutional Clinical and Translational Science Award (University of Wisconsin—Madison; KL2 Grant 1KL2RR025012-01). (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2008-16252-003.) The construct of tobacco dependence is important from both scientific and public health perspectives, but it is poorly understood. The current research integrates person-centered analyses (e.g., latent profile analysis) and variable-centered analyses (e.g., exploratory factor analysis) to clarify the latent structure of nicotine dependence and to guide distillation of the phenotype. Using data from 4 samples of smokers, latent profiles were derived using the Wisconsin Inventory of Smoking Dependence Motives subscale scores. Across all 4 samples, results revealed a unique latent profile that had relative elevations on 4 subscales (Automaticity, Craving, Loss of Control, and Tolerance). Variable-centered analyses supported the uniqueness of these 4 subscales as they constituted a distinct common factor and were the strongest predictors of relapse and other dependence criteria. Conversely, the remaining 9 motives carried little unique predictive validity regarding dependence. Applications of a factor mixture model further supported the presence of a unique class of smokers in relation to a common factor underlying the 4 subscales. The results suggest that a pattern of smoking that is heavy, pervasive, automatic, and relatively unresponive to instrumental contingencies is a necessary and sufficient condition for severe nicotine dependence. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Correction to Foerde et al. (2008).

Reports an error in "Selective corticostriatal dysfunction in schizophrenia: Examination of motor and cognitive skill learning" by Karin Foerde, Russell A. Poldrack, Barbara J. Knowlton, Fred W. Sabb, Susan Y. Bookheimer, Robert M. Bilder, Don Guthrie, Eric Granholm, Keith H. Nuechterlein, Stephen R. Marder and Robert F. Asarnow (Neuropsychology, 2008[Jan], Vol 22[1], 100-109). Table 1 on page 102 should have included the BPRS Depression-Anxiety subscale score 9.00 (3.99) under the column heading Schiz pts. Table displays means with standard deviations in parentheses. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2008-00382-011.) [Correction Notice: An erratum for this article was reported in Vol 22(2) of Neuropsychology (see record 2008-02526-002). The DOI for the supplemental materials was printed incorrectly. The correct DOI is as follows: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0894-4105.22.1.100.supp.] It has been suggested that patients with schizophrenia have corticostriatal circuit dysfunction (Carlsson & Carlsson, 1990). Skill learning is thought to rely on corticostriatal circuitry and different types of skill learning may be related to separable corticostriatal loops (Grafton, Hazeltine, & Ivry, 1995; Poldrack, Prabhakaran, Seger, & Gabrieli, 1999). The authors examined motor (Serial Reaction Time task, SRT) and cognitive (Probabilistic Classification task, PCT) skill learning in patients with schizophrenia and normal controls. Development of automaticity was examined, using a dual task paradigm, across three training sessions. Patients with schizophrenia were impaired at learning on the PCT compared to controls. Performance gains of controls occurred within the first session, whereas patients only improved gradually and never reached the performance level of controls. In contrast, patients were not impaired at learning on the SRT relative to controls, suggesting that patients with schizophrenia may have dysfunction in a specific corticostriatal subcircuit. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Correction to Roberts et al. (2008).

Reports an error in "Effects of the build-up and resetting of auditory stream segregation on temporal discrimination" by Brian Roberts, Brian R. Glasberg and Brian C. J. Moore (Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 2008[Aug], Vol 34[4], 992-1006). The year listed is incorrect. The article should have been dated 2008. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2008-09670-016.) The tendency to hear a tone sequence as 2 or more streams (segregated) builds up, but a sudden change in properties can reset the percept to 1 stream (integrated). This effect has not hitherto been explored using an objective measure of streaming. Stimuli comprised a 2.0-s fixed-frequency inducer followed by a 0.6-s test sequence of alternating pure tones (3 low [L]-high [H] cycles). Listeners compared intervals for which the test sequence was either isochronous or the H tones were slightly delayed. Resetting of segregation should make identifying the anisochronous interval easier. The HL frequency separation was varied (0-12 semitones), and properties of the inducer and test sequence were set to the same or different values. Inducer properties manipulated were frequency, number of onsets (several short bursts vs. one continuous tone), tone:silence ratio (short vs. extended bursts), level, and lateralization. All differences between the inducer and the L tones reduced temporal discrimination thresholds toward those for the no-inducer case, including properties shown previously not to affect segregation greatly. Overall, it is concluded that abrupt changes in a sequence cause resetting and improve subsequent temporal discrimination. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Correction to Fortier et al. (2008).

Reports an error in "Delay discrimination and reversal eyeblink classical conditioning in abstinent chronic alcoholics" by Catherine Brawn Fortier, Elizabeth M. Steffen, Ginette LaFleche, Jonathan R. Venne, John F. Disterhoft and Regina E. McGlinchey (Neuropsychology, 2008[Mar], Vol 22[2], 196-208). The lifetime drinking data listed in Table 1 on p. 198 was not correctly calculated and underestimated lifetime exposure to alcohol. The corrected lifetime variables from that table are included. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2008-02526-007.) Evidence has shown that alcoholism leads to volume reductions in brain regions critical for associative learning using the eyeblink classical conditioning paradigm (EBCC). Evidence indicates that cerebellar shrinkage causes impairment in simple forms of EBCC, whereas changes in forebrain structures result in impairment in more complex tasks. In this study, the ability of abstinent alcoholics and matched control participants to acquire learned responses during delay discrimination and discrimination reversal was examined and related to severity of drinking history and neuropsychological performance. During discrimination learning, one tone (CS+) predicted the occurrence of an airpuff (unconditioned stimulus), and another tone (CS-) served as a neutral stimulus; then the significance of the tones was reversed. Alcoholics who learned the initial discrimination were impaired in acquiring the new CS+ after the tones reversed; this is a function that has previously been linked to forebrain structures. It is suggested that a factor important to alcoholic addiction may be the presence of alcoholic-related associative responses that interfere with the ability to learn new more adaptive associations. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Correction to Amodio et al. (2008).

Reports an error in "Individual differences in the regulation of intergroup bias: The role of conflict monitoring and neural signals for control" by David M. Amodio, Patricia G. Devine and Eddie Harmon-Jones (Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2008[Jan], Vol 94[1], 60-74). In this article, there was an error in Figure 4. The corrected figure is provided in this erratum. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2007-19165-005.) Low-prejudice people vary considerably in their ability to regulate intergroup responses. The authors hypothesized that this variability arises from a neural mechanism for monitoring conflict between automatic race-biased tendencies and egalitarian intentions. In Study 1, they found that low-prejudice participants whose nonprejudiced responses are motivated by internal (but not external) factors exhibited better control on a stereotype-inhibition task than did participants motivated by a combination of internal and external factors. This difference was associated with greater conflict-monitoring activity, measured by event-related potentials, when responses required stereotype inhibition. Study 2 demonstrated that group differences were specific to response control in the domain of prejudice. Results indicate that conflict monitoring, a preconscious component of response control, accounts for variability in intergroup bias among low-prejudice participants. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Correction to Michalowski et al. (2009).

Reports an error in "Brain dynamics in spider-phobic individuals exposed to phobia-relevant and other emotional stimuli" by Jaroslaw M. Michalowski, Christiane A. Melzig, Almut I. Weike, Jessica Stockburger, Harald T. Schupp and Alfons O. Hamm (Emotion, 2009[Jun], Vol 9[3], 306-315). This article contained an incorrect DOI for the supplemental materials. The correct DOI is as follows: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0015550.supp. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2009-07991-002.) Dense sensor event-related brain potentials were measured in participants with spider phobia and nonfearful controls during viewing of phobia-relevant spider and standard emotional (pleasant, unpleasant, neutral) pictures. Irrespective of the picture content, spider phobia participants responded with larger P1 amplitudes than controls, suggesting increased vigilance in this group. Furthermore, spider phobia participants showed a significantly enlarged early posterior negativity (EPN) and late positive potential (LPP) during the encoding of phobia-relevant pictures compared to nonfearful controls. No group differences were observed for standard emotional materials indicating that these effects were specific to phobia-relevant material. Within group comparisons of the spider phobia group, though, revealed comparable EPN and LPP evoked by spider pictures and emotional (unpleasant and pleasant) picture contents. These results demonstrate a temporal unfolding in perceptual processing from unspecific vigilance (P1) to preferential responding (EPN and LPP) to phobia-relevant materials in the spider phobia group. However, at the level of early stimulus processing, these effects of increased attention seem to be related to emotional relevance of the stimulus cues rather than reflecting a fear-specific response. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Correction to Sher et al. (2011).

Reports an error in "Alcohol use trajectories and the ubiquitous cat's cradle: Cause for concern" by Kenneth J. Sher, Kristina M. Jackson and Douglas Steinley (Journal of Abnormal Psychology, np). Due to formatting problems, some of the data and graphic information in the original Figure 7 are not correctly displayed. Although not all data in the original Figure 7 are visible, nothing displayed in that figure was in error. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2011-02783-001.) In recent years, trajectory approaches to characterizing individual differences in the onset and course of substance involvement have gained popularity. Previous studies have sometimes reported 4 prototypic courses: (a) a consistently “low” group, (b) an “increase” group, (c) a “decrease” group, and (d) a consistently “high” group. Although not always recovered, these trajectories are often found, despite these studies varying in the ages of the samples studied and the duration of the observation periods employed. Here, the authors examined the consistency with which these longitudinal patterns of heavy drinking were recovered in a series of latent class growth analyses that systematically varied the age of the sample at baseline, the duration of observation, and the number and frequency of measurement occasions. Data were drawn from a 4-year, 8-wave panel study of college student drinking (N = 3,720). Despite some variability across analyses, there was a strong tendency for these prototypes to emerge regardless of the participants' age at baseline and the duration of observation. These findings highlight potential problems with commonly employed trajectory-based approaches and the need to not over-reify these constructs. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Correction to Croyle et al. (2006).

Reports an error in the original article by R. Croyle et al (Health Psychology, 2006[Apr], 25[3], 425-432). On page 427, the operational definition of cholesterol levels was printed incorrectly. The first full paragraph on the right column of p. 427 should begin "After participants were told their total serum cholesterol level (in mg/dL) and risk category (desirable, 239), they received cholesterol education and follow-up information that complied with the NCEP II guidelines (Expert Panel on Population Strategies for Blood Cholesterol Reduction, 1991)." (The following abstract of this article originally appeared in record 2006-05891-020). The authors conducted a community-based cholesterol screening study to examine accuracy of recall for self-relevant health information in long-term autobiographical memory. Adult community residents (N = 496) were recruited to participate in a laboratory-based cholesterol screening and were also provided cholesterol counseling in accordance with national guidelines. Participants were subsequently interviewed 1, 3, or 6 months later to assess their memory for their test results. Participants recalled their exact cholesterol levels inaccurately (38.0% correct) but their cardiovascular risk category comparatively well (88.7% correct). Recall errors showed a systematic bias: Individuals who received the most undesirable test results were most likely to remember their cholesterol scores and cardiovascular risk categories as lower (i.e., healthier) than those actually received. Recall bias was unrelated to age, education, knowledge, self-rated health status, and self-reported efforts to reduce cholesterol. The findings provide evidence that recall of self-relevant health information is susceptible to self-enhancement bias. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Correction to Castonguay et al. (2010).

Reports an error in "Psychotherapists, researchers, or both? A qualitative analysis of psychotherapists' experiences in a practice research network" by Louis G. Castonguay, Dana L. Nelson, Mary A. Boutselis, Nancy R. Chiswick, Diana D. Damer, Neal A. Hemmelstein, Jeffrey S. Jackson, Marolyn Morford, Stephen A. Ragusea, J. Gowen Roper, Catherine Spayd, Tara Weiszer and Thomas D. Borkovec (Psychotherapy: Theory, Research & Practice, 2010[Sep], Vol 47[3], 345-354). The first sentence of the second paragraph of the author note on page 345 was incorrect. The corrected sentence is as follows: “The study was conducted with funding provided by the Pennsylvania Psychological Association and the Committee for the Advancement of Professional Practice of the American Psychological Association”. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2010-20923-008.) This paper describes the experiences of psychotherapists who, as part of a practice research network (PRN), collaborated with researchers in designing and conducting a psychotherapy study within their own clinical practices. A qualitative analysis of interviews conducted with these psychotherapists led to the delineation of several benefits (e.g., learning information that improved their work with clients and feeling that they were contributing to research that would be useful for psychotherapists) and difficulties for them and their clients (e.g., time and effort required to integrate research protocol into routine clinical practice) that psychotherapists associated with their participation in the PRN. Also identified were a number of strategies used by psychotherapists to address obstacles that they encountered, as well as general recommendations for future PRN studies. As a whole, the experiences of these psychotherapists are likely to provide valuable lessons for the survival and growth of what is viewed by many as a promising pathway for building a stronger bridge between practice and research. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Correction to Killeen et al. (2009).

Reports an error in "Progressive ratio schedules of reinforcement" by Peter R. Killeen, Diana Posadas-Sanchez, Espen Borg? Johansen and Eric A. Thrailkill (Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 2009[Jan], Vol 35[1], 35-50). The URL provided for the supplemental material was incomplete. The complete URL is http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0012497.supp (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2009-00257-007.) Pigeons' pecks produced grain under progressive ratio (PR) schedules, whose response requirements increased systematically within sessions. Experiment 1 compared arithmetic (AP) and geometric (GP) progressions. Response rates increased as a function of the component ratio requirement, then decreased linearly (AP) or asymptotically (GP). Experiment 2 found the linear decrease in AP rates to be relatively independent of step size. Experiment 3 showed pausing to be controlled by the prior component length, which predicted the differences between PR and regressive ratio schedules found in Experiment 4. When the longest component ratios were signaled by different key colors, rates at moderate ratios increased, demonstrating control by forthcoming context. Models for response rate and pause duration based on Bizo and Killeen (1997) described performance on AP schedules; GP schedules required an additional parameter representing the contextual reinforcement. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)