Future Directions of Structural Equation Modeling in Counseling Psychology

The Counseling Psychologist

Volumn 33, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 375-382

  Martens, Matthew P ^a  

^a STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 18744384729     PISSN: 00110000     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0011000005274598     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. American Psychological Association. (2004). Summary report of journal operations, 2003. American Psychologist, 59, 471-472.
2. Betz, N. E. (2005). Enhancing research productivity in counseling psychology: Reactions to three perspectives. The Counseling Psychologist, 33, 358-366.
3. Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: John Wiley.
4. Cohen, J. (1994). The earth is round (p <. 05). American Psychologist, 49, 997-1003.
5. Cooper, M. L. (1994). Motivations for alcohol use among adolescents: Development and validation of a four-factor model. Psychological Assessment, 6, 117-128.
6. Gore-Felton, C. (2005). Understanding quantitative research in counseling psychology: An elusive endeavor in an increasingly diverse discipline. The Counseling Psychologist, 33, 367-374.
7. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55.
8. Kahn, J. H. (2005). Institutional research productivity, use of theory-driven research, and statistical application in counseling psychology: Examining the research base. The Counseling Psychologist, 33, 340-348.
9. Lee, D. (2005). Calls for multiple indices incorporating multiculturalism in content analysis. The Counseling Psychologist, 33, 349-357.
10. Little, T. D., Cunningham, W. A., Shahar, G., & Widaman,K. F. (2002). To parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question, weighing the merits. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 151-173.
11. MacCallum, R. C., & Austin, J. T. (2000). Applications of structural equation modeling in psychological research. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 201-226.
12. Marsh, H. W., Hau, K., & Wen, Z. (2004). In search of golden rules: Comment on hypothesis-testing approaches to setting cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in over generalizing Hu and Bentler’s (1999) findings. Structural Equation Modeling, 11, 320-341.
13. Martens, M. P. (2005). The use of structural equation modeling in counseling psychology research. The Counseling Psychologist, 33, 269-298.
14. McDonald, R. P., & Ho, M. R. (2002). Principles and practice in reporting structural equation analyses. Psychological Methods, 7, 64-82.
15. Stephenson, M. T., & Holbert, R. L. (2003). A Monte Carlo simulation of observable versus latent variable structural equation modeling techniques. Communication Research, 30, 332-354.