Latent state-trait (LST) models (Steyer, Ferring, & Schmitt, 1992) allow separating person-specific (trait) effects from (1) effects of the situation and person × situation interactions, and (2) random measurement error in purely observational studies. Typical LST applications use measurement designs in which all situations are sampled randomly and do not have to be known for any individual. Limitations of conventional LST models for only random situations are that traits are implicitly assumed to generalize perfectly across situations, and that main effects of situations are inseparable from person × situation interaction effects because both are measured by the same latent variable. In this article, we show how these limitations can be overcome by using measurement designs in which two or more random situations are nested within two or more fixed situations that are known for each individual. We present extended LST models for the combination of random and fixed situations (LST-RF approach) and show that the extensions allow (1) examining the extent to which traits are situation-specific and (2) isolating person × situation interactions from situation main effects. We demonstrate that the LST-RF approach can be applied with both homogenous and heterogeneous indicators in either the single- or multilevel structural equation modeling frameworks. Advantages and limitations of the new models as well as their relation to other approaches for studying person × situation interactions are discussed.

The doctoral advisor—typically the principal investigator (PI)—is often characterized as a singular or primary mentor who guides students using a cognitive apprenticeship model. Alternatively, the “cascading mentorship” model describes the members of laboratories or research groups receiving mentorship from more senior laboratory members and providing it to more junior members (i.e., PIs mentor postdocs, postdocs mentor senior graduate students, senior students mentor junior students, etc.). Here we show that PIs’ laboratory and mentoring activities do not significantly predict students’ skill development trajectories, but the engagement of postdocs and senior graduate students in laboratory interactions do. We found that the cascading mentorship model accounts best for doctoral student skill development in a longitudinal study of 336 PhD students in the United States. Specifically, when postdocs and senior doctoral students actively participate in laboratory discussions, junior PhD students are over 4 times as likely to have positive skill development trajectories. Thus, postdocs disproportionately enhance the doctoral training enterprise, despite typically having no formal mentorship role. These findings also illustrate both the importance and the feasibility of identifying evidence-based practices in graduate education.

ADHD symptom reports reflect both trait (48 to 86%) and state (14 to 53%) variance components. The lower amount of shared variability between home and school suggests the setting-specificity of trait and state components of ADHD symptoms. Our findings indicate that ADHD symptom reports may reflect context-specific traits, suggesting the importance of differentiating and targeting ADHD behaviors across different settings.

The objective was to determine and compare the trait and state components of oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) symptom reports across multiple informants. Mothers, fathers, primary teachers, and secondary teachers rated the occurrence of the ODD symptoms in 810 Spanish children (55% boys) on two occasions (end first and second grades). Single source latent state-trait (LST) analyses revealed that ODD symptom ratings from all four sources showed more trait (M = 63%) than state residual (M = 37%) variance. A multiple source LST analysis revealed substantial convergent validity of mothers’ and fathers’ trait variance components (M = 68%) and modest convergent validity of state residual variance components (M = 35%). In contrast, primary and secondary teachers showed low convergent validity relative to mothers for trait variance (Ms = 31%, 32%, respectively) and essentially zero convergent validity relative to mothers for state residual variance (Ms = 1%, 3%, respectively). Although ODD symptom ratings reflected slightly more trait- than state-like constructs within each of the four sources separately across occasions, strong convergent validity for the trait variance only occurred within settings (i.e., mothers with fathers; primary with secondary teachers) with the convergent validity of the trait and state residual variance components being low to non-existent across settings. These results suggest that ODD symptom reports are trait-like across time for individual sources with this trait variance, however, only having convergent validity within settings. Implications for assessment of ODD are discussed.

No abstract

No abstract

Research has yet to determine how much of the true score variance in sluggish cognitive tempo (SCT) symptom ratings is consistent across occasions, sources, and settings versus specific to occasion, source, and setting (i.e., a trait or state-like construct). Our first objective was to determine the amount of variance in SCT ratings that was consistent (trait consistency) across three occasions of measurement over 12-months versus specific to the occasion (occasion-specificity) with ratings by mothers, fathers, primary teachers, and secondary teachers of 811 Spanish children. Our second objective was then to determine the convergent validity for trait consistency and occasion-specificity variance components within and across settings. SCT ratings reflected mostly trait consistency for mothers, fathers, and primary teachers (less so for secondary teachers) with the convergent validity for trait consistency also being strong for mothers with fathers and for primary teachers with secondary teachers. Across home and school, however, convergent validity for trait consistency was low and even lower for occasion-specificity. Although SCT symptoms showed similar levels of trait consistency across occasions and convergent validity within settings as ADHD symptoms in a prior study, SCT symptoms had slightly weaker convergent validity for trait consistency across settings relative to ADHD symptoms.

Developing research self-efficacy is an important part of doctoral student preparation. Despite the documented importance of research self-efficacy, little is known about the progression of doctoral students’ research self-efficacy over time in general and for students from minoritized groups. This study examined both within- and between-person stability of research self-efficacy from semester to semester over 4 years, focusing on doctoral students in biological sciences (N = 336). Using random intercept autoregressive analyses, we evaluated differences in stability across gender, racially minoritized student status, and first-generation student status. Results showed similar mean levels of self-efficacy across demographic groups and across time. However, there were notable differences in between-person and within-person stability over time, specifically showing higher between-person and lower within-person stability for racially minoritized and first-generation students. These findings indicate that racially minoritized and first-generation students’ research self-efficacy reports were less consistent from semester to semester. Such results may indicate that non-minoritized and continuing-generation students’ experiences from semester to semester typically reinforce their beliefs about their own abilities related to conducting research, while such is not the case for racially minoritized nor first-generation students. Future research should examine what types of experiences impact self-efficacy development across doctoral study to offer more precise insights about factors that influence these differences in within-person stability.