Descriptor
Factor Analysis | 19 |
Factor Structure | 19 |
Structural Equation Models | 8 |
Research Methodology | 7 |
Goodness of Fit | 3 |
Scores | 3 |
Adults | 2 |
Comparative Analysis | 2 |
Item Response Theory | 2 |
Measures (Individuals) | 2 |
Reliability | 2 |
More ▼ |
Source
Structural Equation Modeling | 19 |
Author
Glaser, Dale N. | 2 |
Hayduk, Leslie A. | 2 |
Mulaik, Stanley A. | 2 |
Alsup, Ruth | 1 |
Bentler, Peter M. | 1 |
Bollen, Kenneth A. | 1 |
Carlson, Robert G. | 1 |
Chang, Chih-Hung | 1 |
Chen, Fang Fang | 1 |
Conway, James M. | 1 |
Costner, Herbert L. | 1 |
More ▼ |
Publication Type
Journal Articles | 19 |
Reports - Descriptive | 8 |
Reports - Evaluative | 5 |
Reports - Research | 5 |
Book/Product Reviews | 2 |
Speeches/Meeting Papers | 2 |
Information Analyses | 1 |
Education Level
Higher Education | 2 |
Audience
Location
Spain | 1 |
Laws, Policies, & Programs
Assessments and Surveys
General Social Survey | 1 |
Minnesota Multiphasic… | 1 |
Rosenberg Self Esteem Scale | 1 |
What Works Clearinghouse Rating

Mulaik, Stanley A.; Quartetti, Douglas A. – Structural Equation Modeling, 1997
The Schmid-Leiman (J. Schmid and J. M. Leiman, 1957) decomposition of a hierarchical factor model converts the model to a constrained case of a bifactor model with orthogonal common factors that is equivalent to the hierarchical model. This article discusses the equivalence of the hierarchical and bifactor models. (Author/SLD)
Descriptors: Factor Analysis, Factor Structure, Mathematical Models

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
Lubke, Gitta H.; Muthen, Bengt O. – Structural Equation Modeling, 2004
Treating Likert rating scale data as continuous outcomes in confirmatory factor analysis violates the assumption of multivariate normality. Given certain requirements pertaining to the number of categories, skewness, size of the factor loadings, and so forth, it seems nevertheless possible to recover true parameter values if the data stem from a…
Descriptors: Likert Scales, Factor Analysis, Factor Structure, Multivariate Analysis

Wang, Jichuan; Siegal, Harvey A.; Falck, Russell S.; Carlson, Robert G. – Structural Equation Modeling, 2001
Used nine different confirmatory factor analysis models to test the factorial structure of Rosenberg's (M. Rosenberg, 1965) self-esteem scale with a sample of 430 crack-cocaine users. Results partly support earlier research to show a single global self-esteem factor underlying responses to the Rosenberg scale, method effects associated with item…
Descriptors: Adults, Crack, Drug Use, Factor Analysis

Herting, Jerald R.; Costner, Herbert L. – Structural Equation Modeling, 2000
Examines some positions in various arguments related to the proper number of factors and proper number of steps when using structural equation models. Defines the issue in estimating structural equation models as a problem of specifying a model appropriately based on theoretical concerns and then diagnosing ills in the model as well as possible.…
Descriptors: Factor Analysis, Factor Structure, Research Methodology, Structural Equation Models
Chen, Fang Fang; Sousa, Karen H.; West, Stephen G. – Structural Equation Modeling, 2005
We illustrate testing measurement invariance in a second-order factor model using a quality of life dataset (n = 924). Measurement invariance was tested across 2 groups at a set of hierarchically structured levels: (a) configural invariance, (b) first-order factor loadings, (c) second-order factor loadings, (d) intercepts of measured variables,…
Descriptors: Testing, Psychological Studies, Quality of Life, Factor Analysis
Conway, James M.; Lievens, Filip; Scullen, Steven E.; Lance, Charles E. – Structural Equation Modeling, 2004
This simulation investigates bias in trait factor loadings and intercorrelations when analyzing multitrait-multimethod (MTMM) data using the correlated uniqueness (CU) confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) model. A theoretical weakness of the CU model is the assumption of uncorrelated methods. However, previous simulation studies have shown little…
Descriptors: Multitrait Multimethod Techniques, Factor Analysis, Factor Structure, Simulation

Bentler, Peter M. – Structural Equation Modeling, 2000
Discusses issues related to model evaluation in structural equation modeling. Supports nested model comparisons via sequential chi-square difference tests as consistent with the four-step approach to model evaluation when models of the factor analytic simultaneous equation type are entertained. (Author/SLD)
Descriptors: Chi Square, Evaluation Methods, Factor Analysis, Factor Structure

Raines-Eudy, Ruth – Structural Equation Modeling, 2000
Demonstrates empirically a structural equation modeling technique for group comparison of reliability and validity. Data, which are from a study of 495 mothers' attitudes toward pregnancy, have a one-factor measurement model and three sets of subpopulation comparisons. (SLD)
Descriptors: Factor Analysis, Factor Structure, Mothers, Parent Attitudes

Alsup, Ruth; Gillespie, David F. – Structural Equation Modeling, 1997
Data from the General Social Survey for 1977 (n=1,303) and 1991 (n=430) are used to examine the stability of attitudes toward abortion and women's roles. Findings support the hypothesis that public attitudes toward discretionary abortion and nontraditional sex roles are discrete but correlated sets of attitudes that remained stable from 1977 to…
Descriptors: Abortions, Adults, Attitudes, Correlation

Smith, Richard M. – Structural Equation Modeling, 1996
The Rasch item fit approach for detecting multidimensionality in response data is compared with principal component analysis without rotation using simulated data. Results indicate that both approaches work in a variety of multidimensional data structures, but the Rasch item fit is better under some circumstances, as discussed. (SLD)
Descriptors: Comparative Analysis, Factor Analysis, Factor Structure, Goodness of Fit
Previous Page | Next Page ยป
Pages: 1 | 2