An introduction to latent class growth analysis and growth mixture modeling.
In recent years, there has been a growing interest among researchers in the use of latent class and growth mixture modeling techniques for applications in the social and psychological sciences, in part due to advances in and availability of computer software designed for this purpose (e.g. Mplus and SAS Proc Traj) Latent growth modeling approaches, such as latent class growth analysis (LCGA) and growth mixture modeling (GMM) have been increasingly recognized for their usefulness for identifying homogeneous subpopulations within the larger heterogeneous population and for the identification of meaningful groups or classes of individuals. The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of LCGA and GMM, compare the different techniques of latent growth modeling, discuss current debates and issues, and provide readers with a practical guide for conducting LCGA and GMM using the Mplus software. Researchers in the fields of social and psychological sciences are often interested in modeling the longitudinal developmental trajectories of individuals, whether for the study of personality development or for better understanding how social behaviors unfold over time (whether it be days, months, or years) This usually requires an extensive dataset consisting of longitudinal, repeated measures of variables, sometimes including multiple cohorts, and analyzing this data using various longitudinal latent variable modeling techniques such as latent growth curve models (cf. MacCallum Austin, 2000) The objective of these approaches is to capture information about interindividual differences in intraindividual change over time (Nesselroade, 1991) However, conventional growth modeling approaches assume that individuals come from a single population and that a single growth trajectory can adequately approximate an entire population. Also, it is assumed that covariates that affect the growth factors influence each individual in the same way. Yet, theoretical frameworks and existing studies often categorize individuals into distinct subpopulations (e.g. socioeconomic classes, age groups, at risk populations) For example, in the field of alcohol research, theoretical literature suggests different classes