McArdle and colleagues (McArdle, Grimm, Hamagami, Bowles, & Meredith, 2009) have argued that it is not theoretically desirable or necessary for developmental studies to require the same measures over time. Many researchers have supported the use of changing, developmentally-appropriate measures over time (e.g., Eddy, Dishion, & Stoolmiller, 1998; Knight & Zerr, 2010; McArdle et al., 2009; Owens & Shaw, 2003), and others have suggested that the measurement of heterotypic continuity should receive more attention (Schulenberg & Maslowsky, 2009). Several previous studies have implemented growth curves with changing measures. For example, similar to the approach of the present study, Owens and Shaw (2003) predicted growth curves of externalizing problems using different Achenbach scales across different time frames to maintain developmental relevance of the measures. Other studies have examined trajectories of externalizing problems with changing measures (Brame, Nagin, & Tremblay, 2001; Patterson, 1993) or trajectories of other phenotypes (e.g., Pettit, Keiley, Laird, Bates, & Dodge, 2007). However, to infer heterotypic continuity and changes in behavior problems over time with different measures, the measures must be comparable conceptually and empirically. Otherwise, apparent changes in behavior could be due to changes in the functioning of measures.
