Multiverse analyses reveal limited cross-lagged effects in psychological flexibility models, suggesting uncertainty impacts results.
Cross-lagged panel network (CLPN) models estimate prospective effects between several nodes (e.g., symptoms) while adjusting for initial scores on the outcome variables. However, it is well established that such adjusted cross-lagged effects may be spurious due to correlations with residuals and regression toward the mean. Here, we recommend that researchers conduct multiverse analyses, where cross-lagged effects are estimated with alternative models. Then, conclusions can be based on meta-analytic aggregations of the estimated effects. Multiverse analyses will add rigor and transparency to analyses by acknowledging and incorporating, instead of ignoring, uncertainty due to the analyzed model. In an application of this methodology, we found that most cross-lagged effects between indicators of psychological flexibility and inflexibility, reported in a recent study, did not survive scrutiny.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sorjonen et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: