Should age-period-cohort studies return to the methodologies of the 1970s?
Should age-period-cohort studies return to the methodologies of the 1970s?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.socscimed.2015.01.011
复制
发表时间：
2015-03-01
影响因子：
5.4
通讯作者：
Land, Kenneth C.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Reither, Eric N.;Masters, Ryan K.;Land, Kenneth C.
半个世纪以来，社会科学家已经认识到年龄-时期-队列（APC）模型的重要性，但在这段时间里，大部分时间都在争论APC方法的可行性。最近，基于现代统计知识的一类新的APC方法出现了，提供了潜在的解决方案。2009年，Reither， Hauser和Yang使用了一种新的分层APC （HAPC）模型方法来研究出生队列是如何导致美国肥胖流行的。他们发现，最近出生的人群比他们的前辈有更高的肥胖几率，但普遍存在的基于时期的变化是肥胖患病率上升的主要原因。尽管这些发现已经在其他地方得到了重复，但贝尔和琼斯最近的评论对这些发现以及新型APC方法提出了质疑。具体来说，Bell和Jones声称新的APC方法没有充分解决模型识别问题，并建议“坚实的理论”往往足以从经验考虑中去除三个时间维度中的一个。他们还提出了一系列模拟模型，据称这些模型显示了Reither等人（2009）估计的HAPC模型是如何产生误导性结果的。然而，这些模拟模型建立在没有时期效应的假设之上，并且时期和队列变量与结果之间的关联是完全线性的。在这些条件下，决不能使用APC模型。在更站得住脚的假设下，我们自己的模拟表明，HAPC方法在恢复Reither等人（2009）提出的主要发现和Bell和Jones报告的结果方面表现良好。我们还回应了关于模型识别和理论强加约束的批评，发现很少有对这些论点的实用支持。最后，我们鼓励社会科学家超越20世纪70年代的争论，对现代APC方法有更深入的了解。(C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd.版权所有。
Social scientists have recognized the importance of age-period-cohort (APC) models for half a century, but have spent much of this time mired in debates about the feasibility of APC methods. Recently, a new class of APC methods based on modern statistical knowledge has emerged, offering potential solutions. In 2009, Reither, Hauser and Yang used one of these new methods hierarchical APC (HAPC) modeling - to study how birth cohorts may have contributed to the U.S. obesity epidemic. They found that recent birth cohorts experience higher odds of obesity than their predecessors, but that ubiquitous period-based changes are primarily responsible for the rising prevalence of obesity. Although these findings have been replicated elsewhere, recent commentaries by Bell and Jones call them into question along with the new class of APC methods. Specifically, Bell and Jones claim that new APC methods do not adequately address model identification and suggest that "solid theory" is often sufficient to remove one of the three temporal dimensions from empirical consideration. They also present a series of simulation models that purportedly show how the HAPC models estimated by Reither et al. (2009) could have produced misleading results. However, these simulation models rest on assumptions that there were no period effects, and associations between period and cohort variables and the outcome were perfectly linear. Those are conditions under which APC models should never be used. Under more tenable assumptions, our own simulations show that HAPC methods perform well, both in recovering the main findings presented by Reither et al. (2009) and the results reported by Bell and Jones. We also respond to critiques about model identification and theoretically-imposed constraints, finding little pragmatic support for such arguments. We conclude by encouraging social scientists to move beyond the debates of the 1970s and toward a deeper appreciation for modern APC methodologies. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.