Monte Carlo experiments: Design and implementation

Structural Equation Modeling

Volumn 8, Issue 2, 2001, Pages 287-312

  Paxton, Pamela ^a   Curran, Patrick J ^b   Bollen, Kenneth A ^c   Kirby, Jim ^d   Chen, Feinian ^c  

^a OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL   (United States)

^d AGENCY FOR HEALTHCARE RESEARCH AND QUALITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0038525564     PISSN: 10705511     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1207/S15328007SEM0802_7     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1984). The effect of sampling error on convergence, improper solutions, and goodness of fit indices for MLE CFA. Psychometrika, 49,155-173.
2. Bentler, P. M. (1995). EQS: Structural equations program manual (Version 5.0). Los Angeles: BMDP Statistical Software.
3. Beyer, W. H. (1984). CRC standard mathematical tables (27th ed.). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
4. Bollen, K. A. (1996). An alternative 2SLS estimator for latent variable models. Psychometrika, 61, 109-121.
5. Chen, F., Bollen, K. A., Paxton, P., Curran, P. J., & Kirby, J. (forthcoming). Improper solutions in structural equation models: Causes, consequences, and strategies. Sociological Methods and Research.
6. Cleveland, W. S. (1993). Visualizing data. Summit, NJ: Hobart Press.
7. Curran, P. J. (1994). The robustness of confirmatory factor analysis to model misspecification and violations of normality. Dissertation Abstracts International, 55, 1220.
8. Curran, P. J., West, S. G., & Finch, J. (1996). The robustness of test statistics to non-normality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 1, 16-29.
9. Gentle, J. E. (1985). Monte Carlo methods. In S. Kotz & N. L. Johnson (Eds.), The encyclopedia of statistical sciences (Vol. 5, pp. 612-617). New York: Wiley.
10. Gerbing, D. W., & Anderson, J. C. (1993). Monte Carlo evaluations of goodness-of-fit indices for structural equation models. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 40-65). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
11. Hox, J. J. (1995). AMOS, EQS, and LISREL for windows: A comparative approach. Structural Equation Modeling, 1, 79-91.
12. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3, 424-453.
13. Kennedy, P. (1992). A guide to econometrics (3rd ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
14. MacCallum, R. C., Browne, M. W., & Sugawara, H. M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1, 130-149.
15. Mooney, C. Z. (1997). Monte Carlo simulation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
16. Muthén, B. O., & Kaplan, D. (1985). A comparison of some methodologies for the factor analysis of non-normal Likert variables. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 38, 171-189.
17. Muthén, B. O., & Kaplan, D. (1992). A comparison of some methodologies for the factor analysis of non-normal Likert variables: A note on the size of the model. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 45, 19-30.
18. Research and Education Association (staff, with M. Fogiel, Director). (1984). Handbook of mathematical, scientific, and engineering formulas, tables, functions, graphs, transforms. New York: Author.
19. Rubinstein, R. Y. (1981). Simulation and the Monte Carlo method. New York: Wiley
20. Satorra, A., & Saris, W. (1985). Power of the likelihood ratio test in covariance structure analysis. Psychometrika, 51, 83-90.
21. Smith, V. K. (1973). Monte Carlo methods: Their role for econometrics. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
22. Tufte, E. R. (1983). The visual display of quantitative information. Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press.
23. Waller, N. G. (1993). Software review: Seven confirmatory factor analysis programs: EQS, EzPath, LINCS, LISCOMP, LISREL 7, SIMPLIS and CALIS. Applied Psychological Measurement, 17, 73-100.