The Gaussian graphical model (GGM) is an increasingly popular technique used in psychology to characterize relationships among observed variables. These relationships are represented as elements in the precision matrix. Standardizing the precision matrix and reversing the sign yields corresponding partial correlations that imply pairwise dependencies in which the effects of all other variables have been controlled for. The graphical lasso (glasso) has emerged as the default estimation method, which uses ℓ₁ -based regularization. The glasso was developed and optimized for high-dimensional settings where the number of variables (p) exceeds the number of observations (n), which is uncommon in psychological applications. Here we propose to go 'back to the basics', wherein the precision matrix is first estimated with non-regularized maximum likelihood and then Fisher Z transformed confidence intervals are used to determine non-zero relationships. We first show the exact correspondence between the confidence level and specificity, which is due to 1 minus specificity denoting the false positive rate (i.e., α). With simulations in low-dimensional settings (p ≪ n), we then demonstrate superior performance compared to the glasso for detecting the non-zero effects. Further, our results indicate that the glasso is inconsistent for the purpose of model selection and does not control the false discovery rate, whereas the proposed method converges on the true model and directly controls error rates. We end by discussing implications for estimating GGMs in psychology.

Research on individual variation has received increased attention. The bulk of the models discussed in psychological research so far, focus mainly on the temporal development of the mean structure. We expand the view on within-person residual variability and present a new model parameterization derived from classic multivariate GARCH models used to predict and forecast volatility in financial time-series. We propose a new pdBEKK and a modified dynamic conditional correlation (DCC) model that accommodate external time-varying predictors for the within-person variance. The main goal of this work is to evaluate the potential usefulness of MGARCH models for research in within-person variability. MGARCH models partition the within-person variance into, at least, 3 components: An overall constant and unconditional baseline variance, a process that introduces variance conditional on previous innovations, or random shocks, and a process that governs the carry-over effects of previous conditional variance, similar to an AR model. These models allow for variance spillover effects from one time-series to another. We illustrate the pdBEKK- and the DCC-MGARCH on two individuals who have rated their daily positive and negative affect over 100 consecutive days. The full models comprised a multivariate ARMA(1,1) model for the means and included physical activity as moderator of the overall baseline variance. Overall, the pdBEKK seems to result in a more straightforward psychological interpretation, but the DCC is generally easier to estimate and can accommodate more simultaneous time-series. Both models require rather large amounts of datapoints to detect nonzero parameters. We provide an R-package bmgarch that facilitates the estimation of these types of models. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Measurement reliability is a fundamental concept in psychology. It is traditionally considered a stable property of a questionnaire, measurement device, or experimental task. Although intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) are often used to assess reliability in repeated measure designs, their descriptive nature depends upon the assumption of a common within-person variance. This work focuses on the presumption that each individual is adequately described by the average within-person variance in hierarchical models. And thus whether reliability generalizes to the individual level, which leads directly into the notion of individually varying ICCs. In particular, we introduce a novel approach, using the Bayes factor, wherein a researcher can directly test for homogeneous within-person variance in hierarchical models. Additionally, we introduce a membership model that allows for classifying which (and how many) individuals belong to the common variance model. The utility of our methodology is demonstrated on cognitive inhibition tasks. We find that heterogeneous within-person variance is a defining feature of these tasks, and in one case, the ratio between the largest to smallest within-person variance exceeded 20. This translates into a tenfold difference in person-specific reliability! We also find that few individuals belong to the common variance model, and thus traditional reliability indices are potentially masking important individual variation. We discuss the implications of our findings and possible future directions. The methods are implemented in the R package vICC.

An important goal for psychological science is developing methods to characterize relationships between variables. Customary approaches use structural equation models to connect latent factors to a number of observed measurements, or test causal hypotheses between observed variables. More recently, regularized partial correlation networks have been proposed as an alternative approach for characterizing relationships among variables through off-diagonal elements in the precision matrix. While the graphical Lasso (glasso) has emerged as the default network estimation method, it was optimized in fields outside of psychology with very different needs, such as high dimensional data where the number of variables (p) exceeds the number of observations (n). In this article, we describe the glasso method in the context of the fields where it was developed, and then we demonstrate that the advantages of regularization diminish in settings where psychological networks are often fitted ( p≪n ). We first show that improved properties of the precision matrix, such as eigenvalue estimation, and predictive accuracy with cross-validation are not always appreciable. We then introduce nonregularized methods based on multiple regression and a nonparametric bootstrap strategy, after which we characterize performance with extensive simulations. Our results demonstrate that the nonregularized methods can be used to reduce the false-positive rate, compared to glasso, and they appear to provide consistent performance across sparsity levels, sample composition (p/n), and partial correlation size. We end by reviewing recent findings in the statistics literature that suggest alternative methods often have superior performance than glasso, as well as suggesting areas for future research in psychology. The nonregularized methods have been implemented in the R package GGMnonreg.

Gaussian graphical models are commonly used to characterize conditional (in)dependence structures (i.e., partial correlation networks) of psychological constructs. Recently attention has shifted from estimating single networks to those from various subpopulations. The focus is primarily to detect differences or demonstrate replicability. We introduce two novel Bayesian methods for comparing networks that explicitly address these aims. The first is based on the posterior predictive distribution, with a symmetric version of Kullback-Leibler divergence as the discrepancy measure, that tests differences between two (or more) multivariate normal distributions. The second approach makes use of Bayesian model comparison, with the Bayes factor, and allows for gaining evidence for invariant network structures. This overcomes limitations of current approaches in the literature that use classical hypothesis testing, where it is only possible to determine whether groups are significantly different from each other. With simulation we show the posterior predictive method is approximately calibrated under the null hypothesis (α = .05) and has more power to detect differences than alternative approaches. We then examine the necessary sample sizes for detecting invariant network structures with Bayesian hypothesis testing, in addition to how this is influenced by the choice of prior distribution. The methods are applied to posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms that were measured in 4 groups. We end by summarizing our major contribution, that is proposing 2 novel methods for comparing Gaussian graphical models (GGMs), which extends beyond the social-behavioral sciences. The methods have been implemented in the R package BGGM. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

We present a Bayesian nonlinear mixed-effects location scale model (NL-MELSM). The NL-MELSM allows for fitting nonlinear functions to the location, or individual means, and the scale, or within-person variance. Specifically, in the context of learning, this model allows the within-person variance to follow a nonlinear trajectory, where it can be determined whether variability reduces during learning. It incorporates a sub-model that can predict nonlinear parameters for both the location and scale. This specification estimates random effects for all nonlinear location and scale parameters that are drawn from a common multivariate distribution. This allows estimation of covariances among the random effects, within and across the location and the scale. These covariances offer new insights into the interplay between individual mean structures and intra-individual variability in nonlinear parameters. We take a fully Bayesian approach, not only for ease of estimation but also for inference because it provides the necessary and consistent information for use in psychological applications, such as model selection and hypothesis testing. To illustrate the model, we use data from 333 individuals, consisting of three age groups, who participated in five learning trials that assessed verbal memory. In an exploratory context, we demonstrate that fitting a nonlinear function to the within-person variance, and allowing for individual variation therein, improves predictive accuracy compared to customary modeling techniques (e.g., assuming constant variance). We conclude by discussing the usefulness, limitations, and future directions of the NL-MELSM.

An important goal for psychological science is developing methods to characterize relationships between variables. Customary approaches use structural equation models to connect latent factors to a number of observed measurements, or test causal hypotheses between observed variables. More recently, regularized partial correlation networks have been proposed as an alternative approach for characterizing relationships among variables through off-diagonal elements in the precision matrix. While the graphical Lasso (glasso) has emerged as the default network estimation method, it was optimized in fields outside of psychology with very different needs, such as high dimensional data where the number of variables (p) exceeds the number of observations (n). In this article, we describe the glasso method in the context of the fields where it was developed, and then we demonstrate that the advantages of regularization diminish in settings where psychological networks are often fitted ( p≪n ). We first show that improved properties of the precision matrix, such as eigenvalue estimation, and predictive accuracy with cross-validation are not always appreciable. We then introduce nonregularized methods based on multiple regression and a nonparametric bootstrap strategy, after which we characterize performance with extensive simulations. Our results demonstrate that the nonregularized methods can be used to reduce the false-positive rate, compared to glasso, and they appear to provide consistent performance across sparsity levels, sample composition (p/n), and partial correlation size. We end by reviewing recent findings in the statistics literature that suggest alternative methods often have superior performance than glasso, as well as suggesting areas for future research in psychology. The nonregularized methods have been implemented in the R package GGMnonreg.

Intensive longitudinal studies and experience sampling methods are becoming more common in psychology. While they provide a unique opportunity to ask novel questions about within-person processes relating to personality, there is a lack of methods specifically built to characterize the interplay between traits and states. We thus introduce a Bayesian multivariate mixed-effects location scale model (M-MELSM). The formulation can simultaneously model both personality traits (the location) and states (the scale) for multivariate data common to personality research. Variables can be included to predict either (or both) the traits and states, in addition to estimating random effects therein. This provides correlations between location and scale random effects, both across and within each outcome, which allows for characterizing relations between any number of personality traits and the corresponding states. We take a fully Bayesian approach, not only to make estimation possible, but also because it provides the necessary information for use in psychological applications such as hypothesis testing. To illustrate the model we use data from 194 individuals that provided daily ratings of negative and positive affect, as well as their physical activity in the form of step counts over 100 consecutive days. We describe the fitted model, where we emphasize, with visualization, the richness of information provided by the M-MELSM. We demonstrate Bayesian hypothesis testing for the correlations between the random effects. We conclude by discussing limitations of the MELSM in general and extensions to the M-MELSM specifically for personality research.

Mixed-effects models are becoming common in psychological science. Although they have many desirable features, there is still untapped potential. It is customary to view homogeneous variance as an assumption to satisfy. We argue to move beyond that perspective, and to view modeling within-person variance as an opportunity to gain a richer understanding of psychological processes. The technique to do so is based on the mixed-effects location scale model that can simultaneously estimate mixed-effects submodels to both the mean (location) and within-person variance (scale). We develop a framework that goes beyond assessing the submodels in isolation of one another and introduce a novel Bayesian hypothesis test for mean-variance correlations in the distribution of random effects. We first present a motivating example, which makes clear how the model can characterize mean-variance relations. We then apply the method to reaction times (RTs) gathered from 2 cognitive inhibition tasks. We find there are more individual differences in the within-person variance than the mean structure, as well as a complex web of structural mean-variance relations. This stands in contrast to the dominant view of within-person variance (i.e., "noise"). The results also point toward paradoxical within-person, as opposed to between-person, effects: several people had slower and less variable incongruent responses. This contradicts the typical pattern, wherein larger means tend to be associated with more variability. We conclude with future directions, spanning from methodological to theoretical inquires, that can be answered with the presented methodology. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

While there is growing interest in the potential for intranasal oxytocin (IN-OT) to improve social cognition and neurocognition (ie, nonsocial cognition) in schizophrenia, the extant literature has been mixed. Here, we perform a Bayesian meta-analysis of the efficacy of IN-OT to improve areas of social and neurocognition in schizophrenia. A systematic search of original research publications identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of IN-OT as a treatment for social and neurocognitive deficits in schizophrenia for inclusion. Standardized mean differences (SMD) and corresponding variances were used in multilevel Bayesian models to obtain meta-analytic effect-size estimates. Across a total of 12 studies (N = 273), IN-OT did not improve social cognition (SMD = 0.07, 95% credible interval [CI] = [-0.06, 0.17]) or neurocognition (SMD = 0.12, 95% CI = [-0.12, 0.34]). There was moderate between study heterogeneity for social cognition outcomes (τs= 0.12). Moderator analyses revealed that IN-OT had a significantly larger effect on high-level social cognition (ie, mentalizing and theory of mind) compared to low-level social cognition (ie, social cue perception) (b = 0.19, 95% CI = [0.05, 0.33]). When restricting our analysis to outcomes for high-level social cognition, there was a significant effect of IN-OT (SMD = 0.20, 95 % CI = [0.05, 0.33]) but the effect was not robust to sensitivity analyses. The present analysis indicates that IN-OT may have selective effects on high-level social cognition, which provides a more focused target for future studies of IN-OT.