Articles pertaining to the cross-lagged panel correlational technique, a method for selecting among causal interpretations of correlational data, are reviewed. Underlying assumptions, problems in application, and extent of application are discussed. It is concluded that use of the cross-lagged panel correlational technique makes causal inferences more plausible but the technique should not be viewed as a substitute for experimentation.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArlinM.Causal priority of social desirability over self-concept: a cross lagged correlation analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1976, 33, 267–272.
2.
BlalockH.Making causal inferences for unmeasured variables from correlation among indication. American Journal of Sociology, 1963, 69, 53–62.
3.
BlalockH.Causal inferences in nonexperimental research. Chapel Hill: Univer. of North Carolina Press, 1964.
4.
CampbellD. T.From description to experimentation: interpreting trends as quasi-experiments. In HarrisC. W. (Ed.), Problems in measuring change. Madison: Univer. of Wisconsin Press, 1963. Pp. 212–242.
5.
CampbellD. T.ErlebacherA.How regression artifacts in quasi-experimental evaluations can mistakenly make compensatory education look harmful. In HellmuthJ. (Ed.), Disadvantaged child. Vol. 3. New York: Brunner/Mazel, 1970. Pp. 185–210.
6.
CampbellD. T.StanleyJ. C.Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research on teaching. In GageN. L. (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1963. Pp. 172–246. (Reprinted as Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1966).
7.
Clarke-StewartK. A.Interactions between mothers and their young children: characteristics and consequences. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 1973, 38, No. 6–7 (Serial No. 153).
8.
CranoW. D.What do infant mental tests test? a cross-lagged panel analysis of selected data from the Berkeley growth study. Child Development, 1977, 48, 144–151.
9.
CranoW. D.KennyD. A.CampbellD. T.Does intelligence cause achievement? a cross-lagged panel analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1972, 63, 258–275.
10.
DuncanO. D.Path analysis: sociological examples. American Journal of Sociology, 1966, 72, 1–16.
11.
DuncanO. D.Some linear models for two-wave, two-variable panel analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 1969, 72, 177–182.
12.
DuncanO. D.Some linear models for two-wave, two-variable panel analysis, with one-way causation and measurement error. In BlalockH. M.AganbegianA.BorodkinF. M.BoudonR.CapecchiV. (Eds.), Quantitative sociology. New York: Academic Press, 1975. Pp. 285–306.
13.
EronL. D.HuesmannL. R.LefkowitzM. M.WalderL. D.Does television violence cause aggression?American Psychologist, 1972, 27, 253–263.
14.
HannanM. T.RubinsonR.WarrenJ. T.The causal approach to measurement error in panel analysis: some further contingencies. In BlalockH. M. (Ed.), Measurement in the social sciences. Chicago: Aldine, 1974. Pp. 293–323.
15.
HeiseD. R.Causal inference from panel data. In BorgattaE. F.BohrnstedtG. W. (Eds.), Sociological methodology 1970. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1970. Pp. 3–27.
16.
HeiseD. R.Causal analysis. New York: Wiley, 1975.
17.
HookerR. W.Correlation of the marriage-rate with trade. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 1901, 64, 485–492.
18.
HowardK. I.KrauseM. S.Some comments on “techniques for estimating the source and direction of influence in panel data.”Psychological Bulletin, 1970, 74, 219–224.
19.
KennyD. A.Cross-lagged and synchronous common factors in panel data. In GoldbergerA. S.DuncanO. D. (Eds.), Structural equation models in the social sciences. New York: Seminar Press, 1973. Pp. 153–165.
20.
KennyD. A.Cross-lagged panel correlation: a test for spuriousness. Psychological Bulletin, 1975, 82, 887–903.
21.
KesslerR. C.Rethinking the 16-fold table problem. Social Science Research, 1977, 6, 84–107.
22.
LawlerE. E.A correlational-causal analysis of the relationship between expectancy attitudes and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1968, 52, 462–468.
23.
LazarsfeldP. F.The use of panels in social research. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 1946, 92, 405–410.
24.
McNemarQ.Psychological statistics. New York: Wiley, 1949.
25.
McNemarQ.Psychological statistics. (4th ed.) New York: Wiley, 1969.
26.
PelzD. C.AndrewsF. M.Detecting causal priorities in panel study data. American Sociological Review, 1964, 29, 836–848.
27.
PelzD. C.LewR.Heise's causal model applied. In BorgattaE. F.BohrnstedtC. W. (Eds.), Sociological methodology1970. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1970. Pp. 28–37.
28.
PetersC. C.Van VoorhisW. R.Statistical procedures and their mathematical bases. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1940.
29.
RickardS.The assumption of causal analyses for incomplete causal sets of two multilevel variables. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1972, 7, 317–359.
30.
RozelleR. M.The relationship between absenteeism and grades. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1968, 28, 1151–1158.
31.
RozelleR. M.CampbellD. T.More plausible rival hypotheses in the cross-lagged panel correlation technique. Psychological Bulletin, 1969, 71, 74–80.
32.
SandellR. G.Note on choosing between competing interpretations of cross-lagged panel correlations. Psychological Bulletin, 1971, 75, 367–368.
33.
WanousJ. P.A causal-correlational analysis of the job satisfaction and performance relationship. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1974, 59, 139–144.
34.
WrightS.Correlation and causation. Journal of Agricultural Research, 1921, 20, 557–585.
35.
YeeA. H.GageN. L.Techniques for estimating the source and direction of causal inference in panel data. Psychological Bulletin, 1968, 70, 115–126.
