Figure 5:

Structural equation models (SEM) created separately for PSRT and NTC groups. Lines with double-headed arrows represent covariance between variables, and lines with single-headed arrows represent causal paths. Solid lines indicate positive relationships, and dashed lines indicate negative relationships. Thicker lines represent stronger relationships. Means of SRET and CES-D at T0 and the latent change variables (ΔSRET and ΔCES-D) were also modeled but not shown in diagram (see Table 2). Mean depression, as measured by the CES-D, decreased over time for both groups. Mean SRET (measured as negative – positive) also decreased over time for both groups. Primary differences between groups’ LDS models are noted in the relationship between change in SRET from T1 to T2, and change in CES-D from T1 to T2. In the PSRT group, change in SRET and CES-D at T1 is relatively decoupled from change in SRET and CES-D at T2; in the NTC group, change in SRET and CES-D at T1 is significantly and negatively correlated with change in SRET and CES-D at T2. This indicates, for example, that individuals in the NTC group who show more initial improvement are predicted to subsequently worsen (a negative feedback effect), whereas the effect was, if anything, reversed in the PSRT group. Lines in Figures 3 and 4 demonstrate varying individual trajectories of participants’ change.