Estimating models within the mixture model framework, like latent growth mixture modeling (LGMM) or latent class growth analysis (LCGA), involves making various decisions throughout the estimation process. This has led to a wide variety in how results of latent trajectory analysis are reported. To overcome this issue, using a 4-round Delphi study, we developed Guidelines for Reporting on Latent Trajectory Studies (GRoLTS). The purpose of GRoLTS is to present criteria that should be included when reporting the results of latent trajectory analysis across research fields. We have gone through a systematic process to identify key components that, according to a panel of experts, are necessary when reporting results for trajectory studies. We applied GRoLTS to 38 papers where LGMM or LCGA was used to study trajectories of posttraumatic stress after a traumatic event.

A way to summarize one's updated knowledge, balancing prior knowledge with observed data.

Bayesian statistical methods are slowly creeping into all fields of science and are becoming ever more popular in applied research. Although it is very attractive to use Bayesian statistics, our personal experience has led us to believe that naively applying Bayesian methods can be dangerous for at least 3 main reasons: the potential influence of priors, misinterpretation of Bayesian features and results, and improper reporting of Bayesian results. To deal with these 3 points of potential danger, we have developed a succinct checklist: the WAMBS-checklist (When to worry and how to Avoid the Misuse of Bayesian Statistics). The purpose of the questionnaire is to describe 10 main points that should be thoroughly checked when applying Bayesian analysis. We provide an account of "when to worry" for each of these issues related to: (a) issues to check before estimating the model, (b) issues to check after estimating the model but before interpreting results, (c) understanding the influence of priors, and (d) actions to take after interpreting results. To accompany these key points of concern, we will present diagnostic tools that can be used in conjunction with the development and assessment of a Bayesian model. We also include examples of how to interpret results when "problems" in estimation arise, as well as syntax and instructions for implementation. Our aim is to stress the importance of openness and transparency of all aspects of Bayesian estimation, and it is our hope that the WAMBS questionnaire can aid in this process. (PsycINFO Database Record

Although the statistical tools most often used by researchers in the field of psychology over the last 25 years are based on frequentist statistics, it is often claimed that the alternative Bayesian approach to statistics is gaining in popularity. In the current article, we investigated this claim by performing the very first systematic review of Bayesian psychological articles published between 1990 and 2015 (n = 1,579). We aim to provide a thorough presentation of the role Bayesian statistics plays in psychology. This historical assessment allows us to identify trends and see how Bayesian methods have been integrated into psychological research in the context of different statistical frameworks (e.g., hypothesis testing, cognitive models, IRT, SEM, etc.). We also describe take-home messages and provide "big-picture" recommendations to the field as Bayesian statistics becomes more popular. Our review indicated that Bayesian statistics is used in a variety of contexts across subfields of psychology and related disciplines. There are many different reasons why one might choose to use Bayes (e.g., the use of priors, estimating otherwise intractable models, modeling uncertainty, etc.). We found in this review that the use of Bayes has increased and broadened in the sense that this methodology can be used in a flexible manner to tackle many different forms of questions. We hope this presentation opens the door for a larger discussion regarding the current state of Bayesian statistics, as well as future trends. (PsycINFO Database Record

Multilevel Structural equation models are most often estimated from a frequentist framework via maximum likelihood. However, as shown in this article, frequentist results are not always accurate. Alternatively, one can apply a Bayesian approach using Markov chain Monte Carlo estimation methods. This simulation study compared estimation quality using Bayesian and frequentist approaches in the context of a multilevel latent covariate model. Continuous and dichotomous variables were examined because it is not yet known how different types of outcomes-most notably categorical-affect parameter recovery in this modeling context. Within the Bayesian estimation framework, the impact of diffuse, weakly informative, and informative prior distributions were compared. Findings indicated that Bayesian estimation may be used to overcome convergence problems and improve parameter estimate bias. Results highlight the differences in estimation quality between dichotomous and continuous variable models and the importance of prior distribution choice for cluster-level random effects.