Skip to content

Within-person versus between-person cross-lagged panel modeling (RI-CLPM versus CLPM)

Research Method · All research methods
Evidence · 2 claims (1 for, 1 against) · 3 studies (2 associational, 1 review), q1–q2 · 0 of 3 report an effect size · 1 claim rests on one study

Description

A methodological framework distinguishing two ways of analyzing cross-lagged panel data. RI-CLPMs add stable trait factors and evaluate how "within-person deviations in one construct are related to subsequent within-person deviations in another construct," whereas "CLPMs confound the within- and between-person processes." The article argues the two models address different research questions, produce different interpretations, and should be juxtaposed rather than one treated as the default, with model choice resting on theoretical grounds as well as fit.

Accounts

  • Within-person (RI-CLPM) versus between-person (CLPM) perspectives on longitudinal panel data: A methodological framework distinguishing two ways of analyzing cross-lagged panel data. RI-CLPMs add stable trait factors and evaluate how "within-person deviations in one construct are related to subsequent within-person deviations in another construct," whereas "CLPMs confound the within- and between-person processes." The article argues the two models address different research questions, produce different interpretations, and should be juxtaposed rather than one treated as the default, with model choice resting on theoretical grounds as well as fit. (Herbert W. Marsh et al. (2022))
  • RI-CLPM separates within-person processes from time-stable between-person differences, relaxing strong ignorability for time-invariant confounders: The random intercept cross-lagged panel model, introduced by Hamaker et al. (2015), adds random intercepts to the CLPM from a multilevel perspective in which repeated observations are nested within individuals. Its advantage is that "it separates processes that take place within individuals from time-stable observed and unobserved differences between individuals". The article notes the RI-CLPM requires strong ignorability and positivity to hold only after controlling for time-invariant differences between individuals, but cites simulation work questioning whether it controls unobserved confounding. (Hübner et al. (2023))
  • Violating the convergence assumption of cross-lagged models confounds between- and within-person processes of change: The review's central explanatory account is that the reliability of cross-lagged models "rests on the assumption that students do not differ in their trajectories of growth over time". When this convergence assumption is violated — for example, when high- or low-achievers follow different growth trajectories — the estimated cross-lagged effects become unreliable because they mix between-person differences with within-person processes of change. The article frames this as the core methodological issue underlying questionable findings in school motivation research. (Fernando Núñez-Regueiro et al. (2021))

Claims

-

Key Sources

  • Herbert W. Marsh, Reinhard Pekrun, & Oliver Lüdtke. (2022). Directional Ordering of Self-Concept, School Grades, and Standardized Tests Over Five Years: New Tripartite Models Juxtaposing Within- and Between-Person Perspectives. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-022-09662-9
  • Hübner, N., Wagner, W., Zitzmann, S., & Nagengast, B. (2023). How Strong Is the Evidence for a Causal Reciprocal Effect? Contrasting Traditional and New Methods to Investigate the Reciprocal Effects Model of Self-Concept and Achievement. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09724-6
  • Fernando Núñez-Regueiro, Jacques Juhel, Pascal Bressoux, Cécile Nurra. (2021). Identifying Reciprocities in School Motivation Research: A Review of Issues and Solutions Associated With Cross-Lagged Effects Models. Journal of Educational Psychology, 114 (5), pp.945-965. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000700
Page metadata
Field Value
type research-method
id within-person-versus-between-person-cross-lagged-panel-modeling-ri-clpm-versus-clpm
title Within-person versus between-person cross-lagged panel modeling (RI-CLPM versus CLPM)
description A methodological framework distinguishing two ways of analyzing cross-lagged panel data.
status review
generated by process:settle-candidates on 2026-10-19
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.