Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-n8gtw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-06T13:34:27.563Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

umx: Twin and Path-Based Structural Equation Modeling in R

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 April 2019

Timothy C. Bates*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
Hermine Maes
Affiliation:
Virginia Institute of Psychiatric and Behavioral Genetics, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA
Michael C. Neale
Affiliation:
Virginia Institute of Psychiatric and Behavioral Genetics, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA
*
Author for correspondence: Timothy C. Bates, Email: tim.bates@ed.ac.uk

Abstract

Structural equation modeling (SEM) is an important research tool, both for path-based model specification (common in the social sciences) and also for matrix-based models (in heavy use in behavior genetics). We developed umx to give more immediate access, relatively concise syntax and helpful defaults for users in these two broad disciplines. umx supports development, modification and comparison of models, as well as both graphical and tabular outputs. The second major focus of umx, behavior genetic models, is supported via functions implementing standard multigroup twin models. These functions support raw and covariance data, including joint ordinal data, and give solutions for ACE models, including support for covariates, common- and independent-pathway models, and gene × environment interaction models. A tutorial site and question forum are also available.

Information

Type
Articles
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2019
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Example CFA path diagram, showing standardized path estimates.

Figure 1

Table 1. Table of umxPath options

Figure 2

Table 2. Example output table from umxSummary

Figure 3

Table 3. Result of the residuals function on model ‘cfa1’

Figure 4

Fig. 2. A model of aspiration (modified from Duncan et al., 1968).

Figure 5

Table 4. Comparison of effect of dropping reciprocal influence from the duncan model

Figure 6

Table 5. Comparison of equating IQ effects in respondents and friends

Figure 7

Fig. 3. Genetic (A) components of a tri-variate ACE model (C and E not shown) in graphical (left panel) and matrix (right panel) forms.

Figure 8

Fig. 4. Cholesky decomposition (ACE model) of variance in behavior (x) in twin-1 and twin-2, decomposed into A (additive genetic), C (Shared environmental) and E (unique environmental) components. There are two groups in the model: Identical (MZ) twins and Fraternal (DZ) twins.

Figure 9

Fig. 5. Output from plot(m1) for univariate ACE model of weight, rendered as default in DiagrammR (left) and after editing in Omnigraffle (right graphic).

Note: For simplicity, the unit variance of A, C and E are assumed, and not drawn in this figure.
Figure 10

Table 6. Standardized path loadings for ACE model

Figure 11

Table 7. Free paths loadings for ACE model

Figure 12

Table 8. Fit comparison of full ACE model and AE model

Figure 13

Fig. 6. CP twin model with three common factors (CF1, CF2 and CF3), for five measured variables (phenotypes) Var 1–Var 5. The variable-specific A, C and E structure is depicted at the base of the figure (drawn for only first and last phenotypes).

Figure 14

Table 9. CP model common factor path loadings

Figure 15

Table 10. CP model common factor path loadings for each trait

Figure 16

Table 11. CP model standardized specific factor loadings

Figure 17

Table 12. CP model genetic and environmental correlations

Figure 18

Fig. 7. CP model for height and weight plot.

Note: In practice, more than two phenotypes would be measured.
Figure 19

Table 13. Fit comparison dropping shared environment effects from CP model CP1

Figure 20

Fig. 8. IP model with a single independent general factor for each of A, C or D and E loadings on all phenotypes (Var 1–Var 5), and showing the ACE structure of residual variance specific to each phenotype (drawn for variables 1 and 5 only for clarity).

Figure 21

Fig. 9. Univariate gene × measured shared environment twin model.

Figure 22

Fig. 10. GxE analysis default plot output.

Figure 23

Table 14. Model reduction table generated for the example G×E model using umxReduce

Figure 24

Fig. 11. Output graphic from a windowed or ‘LOSEM’ G × age analysis.