Variable-Centered, Person-Centered, and Person-Specific Approaches

Abstract

The variable-centered approach is favored in management and applied psychology, but the personcentered approach is quickly growing in popularity. A partial cause for this rise is the finer-grained detail that it allows. Many researchers may be unaware, however, that another approach may provide even finer-grained detail: the person-specific approach. In the current article, we (a) detail the purpose of each approach, (b) describe how to determine when each approach is most appropriate, and (c) delineate when the approaches diverge to give differing results. Through achieving these goals, we suggest that no single approach is the "best." Instead, the choice of approach should be guided by the research question. To further emphasize this point, we provide illustrative examples using real data to answer three distinct research questions. The results show that each research question can be fully addressed only by the appropriate approach. To conclude, we directly suggest certain research areas that may benefit from the application of person-centered and person-specific approaches. Together, we believe that discussing variable-centered, person-centered, and person-specific approaches together may provide a more thorough understanding of each.

Identifying latent profiles in work‐to‐family conflict and family‐to‐work conflict

“…LPA is an exploratory method of adding profiles stepwise until the data fit the model adequately. LPA assumes that all individuals are independent, and its results provide an estimate of the probability that a particular individual belongs to a profile (posterior probability) based on the criteria variables (Howard & Hoffman, ; Muthén & Muthén, ).…”

“…Therefore, this study recommends that future studies utilize longitudinal data to analyze the causal effect of the latent‐profile membership on outcome variable scores. Indeed, as noted by Howard and Hoffman (), future studies would do well to draw on longitudinal data that allows them to adopt latent transition analysis for assessing the changes in latent profiles over time or analyzing causality between the latent profiles and the outcome variables.…”

“…To examine this assumption, this study adopted latent‐profile analysis (LPA), a method typically used with the person‐centered approach. The main concern researchers have about this person‐centered approach is that it requires identifying the common subpopulations in a sample based on observed continuous variables and investigating the relationships among these subpopulations and antecedents, correlates, and consequences (Howard & Hoffman, ). On the other hand, the variable‐centered approach that most previous work–family studies have adopted focuses on the relationships among WFC, FWC, and other relevant variables using correlation and regression.…”

“…On the other hand, the variable‐centered approach that most previous work–family studies have adopted focuses on the relationships among WFC, FWC, and other relevant variables using correlation and regression. Thus, the studies may become parsimonious and estimate a single set of averaged parameters (Howard & Hoffman, ) while overlooking the various profiles of individuals based on their different levels of WFC and FWC.…”

Outcomes after traffic injury: mental health comorbidity and relationship with pain interference

“…post-traumatic stress and pain in whiplash) and few studies have explored comorbidity in the transition from acute injury to chronicity. [9] By adopting a person-centred approach, [11] further analyses must consider these problems as an integrated system in the person's recovery course. A thorough understanding of the transition of each condition and their associations over time is crucial to develop evidence-based, tailored, integrated interventions that may lead to improved recovery.…”