Description, prediction and causation: Methodological challenges of studying child and adolescent development
Publication date
2020-10
Editors
Advisors
Supervisors
Document Type
Article
Metadata
Show full item recordCollections
License
cc_by
Abstract
Scientific research can be categorized into: a) descriptive research, with the main goal to summarize characteristics of a group (or person); b) predictive research, with the main goal to forecast future outcomes that can be used for screening, selection, or monitoring; and c) explanatory research, with the main goal to understand the underlying causal mechanism, which can then be used to develop interventions. Since each goal requires different research methods in terms of design, operationalization, model building and evaluation, it should form an important basis for decisions on how to set up and execute a study. To determine the extent to which developmental research is motivated by each goal and how this aligns with the research designs that are used, we evaluated 100 publications from the Consortium on Individual Development (CID). This analysis shows that the match between research goal and research design is not always optimal. We discuss alternative techniques, which are not yet part of the developmental scientist’s standard toolbox, but that may help bridge some of the lurking gaps that developmental scientists encounter between their research design and their research goal. These include unsupervised and supervised machine learning, directed acyclical graphs, Mendelian randomization, and target trials.
Keywords
developmental science, causality, directed acyclical graphs, mendelian randomisation, target trials, radical randomization
Citation
Hamaker, E L, Mulder, J D & van IJzendoorn, M H 2020, 'Description, prediction and causation: Methodological challenges of studying child and adolescent development', Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, vol. 46, 100867, pp. 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcn.2020.100867