NotesFAQContact Us
Collection
Advanced
Search Tips
Showing 1 to 15 of 52 results Save | Export
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Brandmaier, Andreas M.; von Oertzen, Timo; McArdle, John J.; Lindenberger, Ulman – Psychological Methods, 2013
In the behavioral and social sciences, structural equation models (SEMs) have become widely accepted as a modeling tool for the relation between latent and observed variables. SEMs can be seen as a unification of several multivariate analysis techniques. SEM Trees combine the strengths of SEMs and the decision tree paradigm by building tree…
Descriptors: Structural Equation Models, Multivariate Analysis, Computation, Factor Analysis
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Li, Libo; Bentler, Peter M. – Psychological Methods, 2011
MacCallum, Browne, and Cai (2006) proposed a new framework for evaluation and power analysis of small differences between nested structural equation models (SEMs). In their framework, the null and alternative hypotheses for testing a small difference in fit and its related power analyses were defined by some chosen root-mean-square error of…
Descriptors: Structural Equation Models, Statistical Analysis, Comparative Analysis
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Bollen, Kenneth A.; Bauldry, Shawn – Psychological Methods, 2011
In the last 2 decades attention to causal (and formative) indicators has grown. Accompanying this growth has been the belief that one can classify indicators into 2 categories: effect (reflective) indicators and causal (formative) indicators. We argue that the dichotomous view is too simple. Instead, there are effect indicators and 3 types of…
Descriptors: Statistical Analysis, Computation, Structural Equation Models, Expertise
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Voelkle, Manuel C.; Oud, Johan H. L.; Davidov, Eldad; Schmidt, Peter – Psychological Methods, 2012
Panel studies, in which the same subjects are repeatedly observed at multiple time points, are among the most popular longitudinal designs in psychology. Meanwhile, there exists a wide range of different methods to analyze such data, with autoregressive and cross-lagged models being 2 of the most well known representatives. Unfortunately, in these…
Descriptors: Authoritarianism, Intervals, Structural Equation Models, Correlation
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Muthen, Bengt; Asparouhov, Tihomir – Psychological Methods, 2012
This rejoinder discusses the general comments on how to use Bayesian structural equation modeling (BSEM) wisely and how to get more people better trained in using Bayesian methods. Responses to specific comments cover how to handle sign switching, nonconvergence and nonidentification, and prior choices in latent variable models. Two new…
Descriptors: Structural Equation Models, Bayesian Statistics, Factor Analysis, Statistical Analysis
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Heene, Moritz; Hilbert, Sven; Draxler, Clemens; Ziegler, Matthias; Buhner, Markus – Psychological Methods, 2011
Fit indices are widely used in order to test the model fit for structural equation models. In a highly influential study, Hu and Bentler (1999) showed that certain cutoff values for these indices could be derived, which, over time, has led to the reification of these suggested thresholds as "golden rules" for establishing the fit or other aspects…
Descriptors: Goodness of Fit, Factor Analysis, Structural Equation Models, Statistical Analysis
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Rindskopf, David – Psychological Methods, 2012
Muthen and Asparouhov (2012) made a strong case for the advantages of Bayesian methodology in factor analysis and structural equation models. I show additional extensions and adaptations of their methods and show how non-Bayesians can take advantage of many (though not all) of these advantages by using interval restrictions on parameters. By…
Descriptors: Structural Equation Models, Bayesian Statistics, Factor Analysis, Computation
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Culpepper, Steven Andrew; Aguinis, Herman – Psychological Methods, 2011
Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) is used widely in psychological research implementing nonexperimental designs. However, when covariates are fallible (i.e., measured with error), which is the norm, researchers must choose from among 3 inadequate courses of action: (a) know that the assumption that covariates are perfectly reliable is violated but…
Descriptors: Statistical Analysis, Error of Measurement, Monte Carlo Methods, Structural Equation Models
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Macho, Siegfried; Ledermann, Thomas – Psychological Methods, 2011
The phantom model approach for estimating, testing, and comparing specific effects within structural equation models (SEMs) is presented. The rationale underlying this novel method consists in representing the specific effect to be assessed as a total effect within a separate latent variable model, the phantom model that is added to the main…
Descriptors: Structural Equation Models, Computation, Comparative Analysis, Sampling
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Lai, Keke; Kelley, Ken – Psychological Methods, 2011
In addition to evaluating a structural equation model (SEM) as a whole, often the model parameters are of interest and confidence intervals for those parameters are formed. Given a model with a good overall fit, it is entirely possible for the targeted effects of interest to have very wide confidence intervals, thus giving little information about…
Descriptors: Accuracy, Structural Equation Models, Computation, Sample Size
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Tucker-Drob, Elliot M. – Psychological Methods, 2011
Experiments allow researchers to randomly vary the key manipulation, the instruments of measurement, and the sequences of the measurements and manipulations across participants. To date, however, the advantages of randomized experiments to manipulate both the aspects of interest and the aspects that threaten internal validity have been primarily…
Descriptors: Experiments, Research Design, Inferences, Individual Differences
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
MacCallum, Robert C.; Edwards, Michael C.; Cai, Li – Psychological Methods, 2012
Muthen and Asparouhov (2012) have proposed and demonstrated an approach to model specification and estimation in structural equation modeling (SEM) using Bayesian methods. Their contribution builds on previous work in this area by (a) focusing on the translation of conventional SEM models into a Bayesian framework wherein parameters fixed at zero…
Descriptors: Structural Equation Models, Bayesian Statistics, Computation, Expertise
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Yuan, Ke-Hai; Hayashi, Kentaro – Psychological Methods, 2010
This article introduces two simple scatter plots for model diagnosis in structural equation modeling. One plot contrasts a residual-based M-distance of the structural model with the M-distance for the factor score. It contains information on outliers, good leverage observations, bad leverage observations, and normal cases. The other plot contrasts…
Descriptors: Structural Equation Models, Data Analysis, Visual Aids
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Enders, Craig K. – Psychological Methods, 2011
The past decade has seen a noticeable shift in missing data handling techniques that assume a missing at random (MAR) mechanism, where the propensity for missing data on an outcome is related to other analysis variables. Although MAR is often reasonable, there are situations where this assumption is unlikely to hold, leading to biased parameter…
Descriptors: Structural Equation Models, Social Sciences, Data, Attrition (Research Studies)
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Pan, Tianshu; Yin, Yue – Psychological Methods, 2012
In the discussion of mean square difference (MSD) and standard error of measurement (SEM), Barchard (2012) concluded that the MSD between 2 sets of test scores is greater than 2(SEM)[superscript 2] and SEM underestimates the score difference between 2 tests when the 2 tests are not parallel. This conclusion has limitations for 2 reasons. First,…
Descriptors: Error of Measurement, Geometric Concepts, Tests, Structural Equation Models
Previous Page | Next Page ยป
Pages: 1  |  2  |  3  |  4