250 likes | 364 Views
Exploring social mobility with latent trajectory group analysis. Patrick Sturgis, University of Southampton and National Centre for Research Methods From work co-authored with Louise Sullivan. Motivation. Conventional focus on correspondence between ‘origin’ and ‘destination’ points
E N D
Exploring social mobility with latent trajectory group analysis Patrick Sturgis, University of Southampton and National Centre for Research Methods From work co-authored with Louise Sullivan
Motivation • Conventional focus on correspondence between ‘origin’ and ‘destination’ points • Does this overlook potentially interesting information about what goes on in-between? • Our approach aims to uncover latent mobility trajectories • And to model the antecedents of membership of different trajectory groups
Conceptual example • we have one child, size of vocabulary measured each year from age 1 to 5 • Plot vocabulary size against time
Add line of best fit Can be expressed as regression equation: y = 0.79x + 1.39
Vocabulary size child 2, t=5 Less rapid growth y = 0.24x + 1.94
Case-by-Case approach • So each individual’s growth trajectory can be expressed as a linear equation: • If we have lots of individual growth equations… • We can find the average of the intercepts… • …and the average of the slopes • And the variances of intercepts and slopes • The averages tell us about initial status and rate of growth for sample as a whole • Variances tell us about individual variability around these averages
Latent curves Extend model to examine variability between individuals in initial position and rate of change
Latent Class Growth Analysis (LCGA) • Latent curve approach yields parameters for whole sample/population • But what if there are qualitatively different growth trajectories? • Use latent class analysis to find distinct groupings which possess similar trajectory parameters • Multinomial logistic regression of group membership on fixed covariates
Data • 1970 British Cohort Study • Every child born in week in 1970 • n = • Direct Maximum Likelihood
Registrar General’s Social Class I Professional etc occupations II Managerial and technical occupations IIIN Skilled non-manual occupations IIIM Skilled manual occupations IV Partly-skilled occupations V Unskilled occupations
Covariate coefficient contrasts for trajectory group membership
Conclusions • Potentially useful approach • But this exercise hasn’t told us much new in substantive terms • Problem = endogeneity of predictors • Extension = modelling different cohorts simultaneously