Descriptor
Source
Structural Equation Modeling | 115 |
Author
Raykov, Tenko | 12 |
Marcoulides, George A. | 6 |
Duncan, Terry E. | 4 |
Lee, Sik-Yum | 4 |
Marsh, Herbert W. | 4 |
Rigdon, Edward E. | 4 |
Dolan, Conor V. | 3 |
Duncan, Susan C. | 3 |
Fan, Xitao | 3 |
Hancock, Gregory R. | 3 |
Harlow, Lisa L. | 3 |
More ▼ |
Publication Type
Journal Articles | 115 |
Reports - Descriptive | 45 |
Reports - Evaluative | 37 |
Reports - Research | 22 |
Book/Product Reviews | 5 |
Information Analyses | 4 |
Guides - Non-Classroom | 2 |
Reference Materials -… | 2 |
Speeches/Meeting Papers | 2 |
Education Level
Early Childhood Education | 1 |
Higher Education | 1 |
Audience
Researchers | 1 |
Location
Belgium | 1 |
Laws, Policies, & Programs
Assessments and Surveys
What Works Clearinghouse Rating

Lubke, Gitta H.; Dolan, Connor V. – Structural Equation Modeling, 2003
Simulation results show that the power to detect small mean differences when fitting a model with free residual variances across groups decreases as the difference in R squared increases. This decrease is more pronounced in the presence of correlated errors and if group sample sizes differ. (SLD)
Descriptors: Correlation, Factor Structure, Sample Size, Simulation

Hamaker, Ellen L.; Dolan, Conor V.; Molenaar, Peter C. M. – Structural Equation Modeling, 2002
Reexamined the nature of structural equation modeling (SEM) estimates of autoregressive moving average (ARMA) models, replicated the simulation experiments of P. Molenaar, and examined the behavior of the log-likelihood ratio test. Simulation studies indicate that estimates of ARMA parameters observed with SEM software are identical to those…
Descriptors: Maximum Likelihood Statistics, Regression (Statistics), Simulation, Structural Equation Models

Stapleton, Laura M. – Structural Equation Modeling, 2002
Studied the use of different weighting techniques in structural equation modeling and found, through simulation, that the use of an effective sample size weight provides unbiased estimates of key parameters and their sampling variances. Also discusses use of a popular normalization technique of scaling weights. (SLD)
Descriptors: Estimation (Mathematics), Sample Size, Scaling, Simulation

Markus, Keith A. – Structural Equation Modeling, 2000
Explores the four-step procedure for testing structural equation models and outlines some problems with the approach advocated by L. Hayduk and D. Glaser (2000) and S. Mulaik and R. Milsap (2000). Questions the idea that there is a "correct" number of constructs for a given phenomenon. (SLD)
Descriptors: Factor Analysis, Factor Structure, Research Methodology, Structural Equation Models

Hayduk, Leslie A.; Glaser, Dale N. – Structural Equation Modeling, 2000
Focuses on the four-step method (four nested models) of structural equation modeling advocated by S. Mulaik (1997, 1998), discussing the limitations of the approach and considering the tests and criteria to be used in moving among the four steps. (SLD)
Descriptors: Factor Analysis, Factor Structure, Research Methodology, Structural Equation Models

Mulaik, Stanley A.; Millsap, Roger E. – Structural Equation Modeling, 2000
Defends the four-step approach to structural equation modeling based on testing sequences of models and points out misunderstandings of opponents of the approach. The four-step approach allows the separation of respective constraints within a structural equation model. (SLD)
Descriptors: Factor Analysis, Factor Structure, Research Methodology, Structural Equation Models

Bollen, Kenneth A. – Structural Equation Modeling, 2000
Neither the four-step model nor the one-step procedure can actually tell whether the researcher has the right number of factors in structural equation modeling. In fact, for reasons discussed, a simple formulaic approach to the correct specification of models does not yet exist. (SLD)
Descriptors: Factor Analysis, Factor Structure, Research Methodology, Structural Equation Models

Hayduk, Leslie A.; Glaser, Dale N. – Structural Equation Modeling, 2000
Replies to commentaries on the four-step approach to structural equation modeling, pointing out the strengths and weaknesses of each argument and ultimately concluding that the four-step model is subject to criticisms that can be addressed to factor analysis as well. (SLD)
Descriptors: Factor Analysis, Factor Structure, Research Methodology, Structural Equation Models

Nevitt, Jonathan; Hancock, Gregory R. – Structural Equation Modeling, 2001
Evaluated the bootstrap method under varying conditions of nonnormality, sample size, model specification, and number of bootstrap samples drawn from the resampling space. Results for the bootstrap suggest the resampling-based method may be conservative in its control over model rejections, thus having an impact on the statistical power associated…
Descriptors: Estimation (Mathematics), Power (Statistics), Sample Size, Structural Equation Models
Lee, Sik-Yum; Song, Xin-Yuan; Skevington, Suzanne; Hao, Yua-Tao – Structural Equation Modeling, 2005
Quality of life (QOL) has become an important concept for health care. As QOL is a multidimensional concept that is best evaluated by a number of latent constructs, it is well recognized that latent variable models, such as exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) are useful tools for analyzing QOL data. Recently,…
Descriptors: Questionnaires, Quality of Life, Factor Analysis, Structural Equation Models
Wicherts, Jelte M.; Dolan, Conor V. – Structural Equation Modeling, 2004
Information fit indexes such as Akaike Information Criterion, Consistent Akaike Information Criterion, Bayesian Information Criterion, and the expected cross validation index can be valuable in assessing the relative fit of structural equation models that differ regarding restrictiveness. In cases in which models without mean restrictions (i.e.,…
Descriptors: Goodness of Fit, Structural Equation Models, Factor Structure, Indexes

Rigdon, Edward E. – Structural Equation Modeling, 1998
Continuing a discussion of the topic of fit assessment in structural equation modeling, this article accepts the compromise proposed by H. Marsh (1998) and offers tentative heuristic models for interpreting fit indices that involve the new baseline model proposed by E. Rigdon (1998). (SLD)
Descriptors: Comparative Analysis, Correlation, Goodness of Fit, Heuristics

Rigdon, Edward E. – Structural Equation Modeling, 1996
This revision of the structural equation modeling (SEM) package developed by J. L. Arbuckle is a commercial product that can compete with other SEM software. The revision contains new documentation, improvements in the way the program saves files, and new drawing tools. It is a substantial improvement over earlier versions. (SLD)
Descriptors: Computer Software, Computer Software Evaluation, Data Analysis, Structural Equation Models

Breithaupt, Krista; Zumbo, Bruno D. – Structural Equation Modeling, 2002
Evaluated the sample invariance of item discrimination statistics in a case study using real data, responses of 10 random samples of 500 people to a depression scale. Results lend some support to the hypothesized superiority of a two-parameter item response model over the common form of structural equation modeling, at least when responses are…
Descriptors: Case Studies, Depression (Psychology), Item Response Theory, Structural Equation Models

Song, Xin-Yuan; Lee, Sik-Yum – Structural Equation Modeling, 2002
Developed a Bayesian approach for a general multigroup nonlinear factor analysis model that simultaneously obtains joint Bayesian estimates of the factor scores and the structural parameters subjected to some constraints across different groups. (SLD)
Descriptors: Bayesian Statistics, Estimation (Mathematics), Factor Analysis, Scores