Psychometrika

, Volume 70, Issue 3, pp 557–578

Causal inferences with group based trajectory models

Article

Abstract

A central theme of research on human development and psychopathology is whether a therapeutic intervention or a turning-point event, such as a family break-up, alters the trajectory of the behavior under study. This paper lays out and applies a method for using observational longitudinal data to make more confident causal inferences about the impact of such events on developmental trajectories. The method draws upon two distinct lines of research: work on the use of finite mixture modeling to analyze developmental trajectories and work on propensity scores. The essence of the method is to use the posterior probabilities of trajectory group membership from a finite mixture modeling framework, to create balance on lagged outcomes and other covariates established prior to t for the purpose of inferring the impact of first-time treatment at t on the outcome of interest. The approach is demonstrated with an analysis of the impact of gang membership on violent delinquency based on data from a large longitudinal study conducted in Montreal.

Keywords

Causal inference finite mixture models propensity scores 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Cloward R.A., Ohlin L.E. (1960) Delinquency and Opportunity: A Theory of Delinquent Gangs. Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. Cohen A.K. (1955) Delinquent Boys: The Culture of the Gang. Free Press, Glencoe, ILGoogle Scholar
  3. Drake C. (1993) Effects of misspecification of the propensity score on estimators of treatment effect. Biometrics 49:1231–1236Google Scholar
  4. Elder G.H. Jr. (1985) Perspectives on the life course. In: Elder G.H. Jr. (ed) Life Course Dynamics. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NYGoogle Scholar
  5. Elder G.H. Jr. (1998) The life course as developmental theory. Child Development 69:1–12Google Scholar
  6. Farrington D.P. (1986) Age and crime. In: Tonry M., Morris N. (eds) Crime and Justice: An Annual Review of Research, Vol. 7. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  7. Haviland A., Nagin D.S., Rosenbaum P.R. (2005) Combining group-based trajectory analysis, propensity scores, and matching for causal analysis of the effect of gang membership on violence. Manuscript under preparationGoogle Scholar
  8. Imbens G. (2004) Nonparametric estimation of average treatment effects under exogeneity: A review. Review of Economics and Statistics 86:4–29Google Scholar
  9. Jones B.L., Nagin D., Roeder K. (2001) An SAS procedure based on mixture models for estimating developmental trajectories. Sociological Research and Methods 29:374–393Google Scholar
  10. Korn E.L., Graubard B. (1999) Analysis of Health Surveys. Series in Probability and Statistics. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. Lacourse E., Nagin D., Vitaro F., Claes M., Tremblay R.E. (2003) Developmental trajectories of boys delinquent group membership and facilitation of violent behaviors during adolescence. Development and Psychopathology 15:183–197Google Scholar
  12. Leon A.C., Hedeker D. (2005) A mixed-effects quintile-stratified propensity adjustment for effectiveness analyses of ordered categorical doses. Statistics in Medicine 24:647–658Google Scholar
  13. Leon A.C., Mueller T.I., Solomon D.A., Keller M.B. (2001) A dynamic adaptation of the propensity score adjustment for effectiveness analyses of ordinal doses of treatment. Statistics in Medicine 20:1487–1498Google Scholar
  14. Li Y.P., Propert K.J., Rosenbaum P.R. (2001) Balanced risk set matching. Journal of the American Statistical Association 96:870–882Google Scholar
  15. Muthén B.O. (2001) Second-generation structural equation modeling with a combination of categorical and continuous latent variables: New opportunities for latent class/latent curve modeling. In: Sayers A., Collins L. (eds) New Methods for the Analysis of Change. American Psychological Association, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  16. Muthén B., Shedden K. (1999) Finite mixture modeling with mixture outcomes using the EM algorithm. Biometrics 55:463–469Google Scholar
  17. Nagin D.S. (1999) Analyzing developmental trajectories: Semi-parametric, group-based approach. Psychological Methods 4:39–177Google Scholar
  18. Nagin D.S. (2005) Group-Based Modeling of Development. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  19. Nagin D., Farrington D., Moffitt T. (1995) Life-course trajectories of different types of offenders. Criminology 33:111–139Google Scholar
  20. Nagin D.S., Land K.C. (1993) Age, criminal careers, and population heterogeneity: Specification and estimation of a nonparametric, mixed Poisson model. Criminology 31:327–362Google Scholar
  21. Pogarsky G., Lizotte A.J., Thornberry T.P. (2003) The delinquency of children born to young mothers: Results from the Rochester Youth Development Study. Criminology 41:101–138Google Scholar
  22. Robins J.M. (1987) A graphical approach to the identification and estimation of causal parameters in mortality studies with sustained exposure periods. Journal of Chronic Disease 40(Suppl. 2):139S–161SGoogle Scholar
  23. Robins J., Greenland S., Hu F. (1999) Estimation of the causal effect of time-varying exposure on the marginal mean of a repeated binary outcome. Journal of the American Statistical Association 94:687–770Google Scholar
  24. Roeder K., Lynch K., Nagin D. (1999). Modeling uncertainty in latent class membership: A case study in criminology. Journal of the American Statistical Association 94:766–776Google Scholar
  25. Rosenbaum P.R. (2002) Observational Studies, 2nd ed. Springer-Verlag, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  26. Rosenbaum P., Rubin D. (1983) The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika 70:41–55Google Scholar
  27. Rosenfeld R., Bray T.E., Egley A. (1994) Facilitating violence: A comparison of gang-motivated, gang-affiliated, and non-gang youth homicides. Journal of Quantitative Criminology 15:495–516Google Scholar
  28. Rubin D.B. (1979) Using multivariate matched sampling and regression adjustment to control bias in observational studies. Journal of the American Statistical Association 74(366):318–328Google Scholar
  29. Short J.F. Jr., Stodtbeck F.L. (1965) Group Process and Gang Delinquency. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  30. Thornberry T., Krohn M., Lizotte A., Smith C., Tobin K. (2003) Gangs and Delinquency in Developmental Perspective. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  31. Tremblay R.E., Desmarais-Gervais L., Gagnon C., Charlebois P. (1987) The preschool behavior questionnaire: Stability of its factor structure between culture, sexes, ages, and socioeconomic classes. International Journal of Behavioral Development 10:467–484Google Scholar
  32. Wasserman L. (1999) Comment on ‘Estimation of the causal effect of time-varying exposure on the marginal mean of a repeated binary outcome’. Journal of the American Statistical Association 94:704–706Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Psychometric Society 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Associate StatisticanRand CorporationPittsburghUSA
  2. 2.Carnegie Mellon UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations