Evaluating Measurement Invariance with Censored Ordinal Data: A Monte Carlo Comparison of Alternative Model Estimators and Scales of Measurement

Evaluations of measurement invariance provide essential construct validity evidence. However, the quality of such evidence is partly dependent upon the validity of the resulting statistical conclusions. The presence of Type I or Type II errors can render measurement invariance conclusions meaningless. The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of categorization and censoring on the behavior of the chi-square/likelihood ratio test statistic and two alternative fit indices (CFI and RMSEA) under the context of evaluating measurement invariance. Monte Carlo simulation was used to examine Type I error and power rates for the (a) overall test statistic/fit indices, and (b) change in test statistic/fit indices. Data were generated according to a multiple-group single-factor CFA model across 40 conditions that varied by sample size, strength of item factor loadings, and categorization thresholds. Seven different combinations of model estimators (ML, Yuan-Bentler scaled ML, and WLSMV) and specified measurement scales (continuous, censored, and categorical) were used to analyze each of the simulation conditions. As hypothesized, non-normality increased Type I error rates for the continuous scale of measurement and did not affect error rates for the categorical scale of measurement. Maximum likelihood estimation combined with a categorical scale of measurement resulted in more correct statistical conclusions than the other analysis combinations. For the continuous and censored scales of measurement, the Yuan-Bentler scaled ML resulted in more correct conclusions than normal-theory ML. The censored measurement scale did not offer any advantages over the continuous measurement scale. Comparing across fit statistics and indices, the chi-square-based test statistics were preferred over the alternative fit indices, and ΔRMSEA was preferred over ΔCFI. Results from this study should be used to inform the modeling decisions of applied researchers. However, no single analysis combination can be recommended for all situations. Therefore, it is essential that researchers consider the context and purpose of their analyses.

Planning “Discrete” Movements Using a Continuous System: Insights from a Dynamic Field Theory of Movement Preparation

The timed-initiation paradigm developed by Ghez and colleagues (1997) has revealed two modes of motor planning: continuous and discrete. Continuous responding occurs when targets are separated by less than 60° of spatial angle, and discrete responding occurs when targets are separated by greater than 60°. Although these two modes are thought to reflect the operation of separable strategic planning systems, a new theory of movement preparation, the Dynamic Field Theory, suggests that two modes emerge flexibly from the same system. Experiment 1 replicated continuous and discrete performance using a task modified to allow for a critical test of the single system view. In Experiment 2, participants were allowed to correct their movements following movement initiation (the standard task does not allow corrections). Results showed continuous planning performance at large and small target separations. These results are consistent with the proposal that the two modes reflect the time-dependent “preshaping” of a single planning system.

Generalizing the dynamic field theory of spatial cognition across real and developmental time scales

Within cognitive neuroscience, computational models are designed to provide insights into the organization of behavior while adhering to neural principles. These models should provide sufficient specificity to generate novel predictions while maintaining the generality needed to capture behavior across tasks and/or time scales. This paper presents one such model, the Dynamic Field Theory (DFT) of spatial cognition, showing new simulations that provide a demonstration proof that the theory generalizes across developmental changes in performance in four tasks—the Piagetian A-not-B task, a sandbox version of the A-not-B task, a canonical spatial recall task, and a position discrimination task. Model simulations demonstrate that the DFT can accomplish both specificity—generating novel, testable predictions—and generality—spanning multiple tasks across development with a relatively simple developmental hypothesis. Critically, the DFT achieves generality across tasks and time scales with no modification to its basic structure and with a strong commitment to neural principles. The only change necessary to capture development in the model was an increase in the precision of the tuning of receptive fields as well as an increase in the precision of local excitatory interactions among neurons in the model. These small quantitative changes were sufficient to move the model through a set of quantitative and qualitative behavioral changes that span the age range from 8 months to 6 years and into adulthood. We conclude by considering how the DFT is positioned in the literature, the challenges on the horizon for our framework, and how a dynamic field approach can yield new insights into development from a computational cognitive neuroscience perspective.