I really appreciate this wrote up and that link Ill look into it. Of course its not an exact science but I absolutely believe in the potential SEM related methods like Latent growth models etc has especially done longitudinally with mixed effects which improves a case for causality. the thing that sucks is most of social psychology (hell majority of psych) are doing anovas and regressions instead of taking it up a notch if you feel me? regardless i appreciate your devotion to trying to keep social psych grounded as a field! psychology as a whole has a lot of stinkers in it haha lots of p hacking, file drawyer, and false positives etc lol
I agree that longitudinal mixed models are better for causal inference. Wish I had the same optimism as you about SEM methods!
Yeah, there's a lot of bad work done in social psych, but the field is waking up to that which makes it an exciting time - lots of work is being overturned and we have an opportunity to fix things from the ground up. I hope we can do work that is actually useful to more people than just marketing agencies lol
The way I see it those investing in methods enough to be using SEM acknowledge the limitations and with enough education (which is really pumping even 3 years ago when i was in a lab) ways of applying it can definitely be shifted imo. When I was taught it they definitely said use a metric fuck ton of salt lmao.
I think shifting to a Hierarchical linear approach will will also be necessary as many of these things are nested. tbh i haven’t had enough advanced knowledge to know how the methods have been applied to together other than intra individual approaches in latent growth curves (i worked with them independently and probably a rather surface level tbh) you are much more knowledgeable though than me so Im sure your skepticism and lack of optimism is very warranted
I really appreciate this wrote up and that link Ill look into it. Of course its not an exact science but I absolutely believe in the potential SEM related methods like Latent growth models etc has especially done longitudinally with mixed effects which improves a case for causality. the thing that sucks is most of social psychology (hell majority of psych) are doing anovas and regressions instead of taking it up a notch if you feel me? regardless i appreciate your devotion to trying to keep social psych grounded as a field! psychology as a whole has a lot of stinkers in it haha lots of p hacking, file drawyer, and false positives etc lol
I agree that longitudinal mixed models are better for causal inference. Wish I had the same optimism as you about SEM methods!
Yeah, there's a lot of bad work done in social psych, but the field is waking up to that which makes it an exciting time - lots of work is being overturned and we have an opportunity to fix things from the ground up. I hope we can do work that is actually useful to more people than just marketing agencies lol
The way I see it those investing in methods enough to be using SEM acknowledge the limitations and with enough education (which is really pumping even 3 years ago when i was in a lab) ways of applying it can definitely be shifted imo. When I was taught it they definitely said use a metric fuck ton of salt lmao.
I think shifting to a Hierarchical linear approach will will also be necessary as many of these things are nested. tbh i haven’t had enough advanced knowledge to know how the methods have been applied to together other than intra individual approaches in latent growth curves (i worked with them independently and probably a rather surface level tbh) you are much more knowledgeable though than me so Im sure your skepticism and lack of optimism is very warranted