Figure 3.

Networks depicting results of a person-specific model (i.e., GIMME) used to analyze 75-day intensive longitudinal data. Circles reflect nodes/variables, solid lines reflect same-day relations, dashed lines reflect lagged next-day relations, black lines reflect group-level relations in summary networks, gray lines reflect individual-level relations in summary networks (thickness is proportion of students with a given relation), blue lines reflect negative relations in person-specific networks, and red lines reflect positive relations in person-specific networks; for blue and red lines, thickness reflects relation magnitude. All networks fit the data well; see Supplemental Materials Table S3 for fit indices. A.) Summary network for students during a period of heightened sociopolitical stress (i.e., the 2016 election group) with two group-level autoregressive effects for somatic symptoms and anxiety. B.) Summary network for students in 2017 (i.e., the control group) with one group-level autoregressive effect for somatic symptoms. C.) Group differences in network complexity (i.e., the number of connections per network). D.) Example student-specific network from the election group with a negative, contemporaneous relation between verbal recall and anxiety (among others). E.) Example student-specific network from the control group with a positive, lagged relation between verbal recall and anxiety (among others). F.) Example student-specific network from the election group demonstrating denser relations with four edges and two autoregressive effects. G.) Example student-specific network from the control group demonstrating more sparse relations with two edges and two autoregressive effects. The R² reflects the strength of the relation between delayed verbal recall and anxiety for an individual student (calculated using a formula developed by Peterson & Brown, 2005). VR = delayed verbal recall; SS = somatic symptoms; ANX = anxiety; INT = intellectual interest.