Conceptual shell games in the four-step debate

Structural Equation Modeling

Volumn 7, Issue 2, 2000, Pages 163-173

  Markus, Keith A ^a  

^a JOHN JAY COLLEGE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0039260463     PISSN: 10705511     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1207/S15328007SEM0702_2     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 411-423.
2. Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1992). Assumptions and comparative strengths of the two-step approach: Comment on Fornell and Yi. Sociological Methods and Research, 20, 321-333.
3. Cooper, G. F. (1999). An overview of the representation and discovery of causal relationships using Bayesian networks. In C. Glymour & G. R. Cooper (Eds.), Computation, causation, and discovery (pp. 3-62). Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press.
4. Descartes, R. (1976). The essential Descartes (M. D. Wilson, Ed.). New York: Meridian. (Original texts published between 1627 and 1649)
5. Fornell, C., & Yi, Y. (1992a). Assumptions of the two-step approach: Reply to Anderson and Gerbing. Sociological Methods and Research, 20, 334-339.
6. Fornell, C., & Yi, Y. (1992b). Assumptions of the two-step approach to latent variable modeling. Sociological Methods and Research, 20, 291-320.
7. Hayduk, L. A. (1987). Structural equation modeling with LISREL: Essentials and advances. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
8. Hayduk, L. A. (1994). Personal space: Understanding the simplex model. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 18, 245-260.
9. Hayduk, L. A. (1996). LISREL issues, debates and strategies. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
10. Hayduk, L. A., & Glaser, D. N. (2000). Jiving the four-step, waltzing around factor analysis, and other serious fun. Structural Equation Modeling, 7, 1-35.
11. James, L. R., Mulaik, S. A., & Brett, J. M. (1982). Causal analysis: assumptions, models, and data. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
12. Markus, K. A. (1998a). Science, measurement, and validity: Is completion of Samuel Messick's synthesis possible? Social Indicators Research, 45, 7-34.
13. Markus, K. A. (1998b). Validity, facts, and values sans closure: Reply to Messick, Reckase, Moss, and Zimmerman. Social Indicators Research, 45, 73-82.
14. Markus, K. A. (1999, August). Concepts versus constructs in theories of integrity. Paper presented at the 107th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, Boston.
15. Messick, S. (1975). The standard problem: Meaning and values in measurement and evaluation. American Psychologist, 30, 955-966.
16. Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed., pp. 13-103). New York: American Council on Education.
17. Messick, S. (1998). Test validity: A matter of consequence. Social Indicators Research, 45, 35-44.
18. Millikan, R. G. (1993). White queen psychology and other essays for Alice. Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
19. Moss, P. A. (1998). Recovering a dialectical view of rationality. Social Indicators Research, 45, 55-67.
20. Mulaik, S. A. (1987). A brief history of the philosophical foundations of exploratory factor analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 22, 267-305.
21. Mulaik, S. A. (1993). Objectivity and multivariate statistics. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 28, 171-203.
22. Mulaik, S. A. (1994). Kant, Wittgenstein, objectivity, and structural equations modeling. In C. R. Reynolds (Ed.), Cognitive assessment: a multidisciplinary perspective (pp. 209-236). New York: Plenum.
23. Mulaik, S. A., & James, L. R. (1995). Objectivity and reasoning in science and structural equation modeling. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications (118-137). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
24. Mulaik, S. A., & Millsap, R. E. (2000). Doing the four-step right. Structural Equation Modeling, 7, 36-73.
25. Reckase, M. D. (1998). The interaction of values and validity assessment: Does a test's level of validity depend on a researcher's values? Social Indicators Research, 45, 45-54.
26. Schouls, P. A. (1980). The imposition of method: A study of Descartes and Locke. Oxford, England: Clarendon.
27. Zimmerman, D. W. (1998). Commentary on "Science, measurement, and validity: Is completion of Samuel Messick's synthesis possible?" by Keith A. Markus. Social Indicators Research, 45, 73-82.