A non-arbitrary method of identifying and scaling latent variables in SEM and MACS models

Structural Equation Modeling

Volumn 13, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 59-72

  Little, Todd D ^a   Siegers, David W ^a   Card, Noel A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COVARIANCE STRUCTURES; LATENT VARIABLE; METHOD OF IDENTIFICATIONS; MODEL FIT; MULTIPLE-GROUP; STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING;

IDENTIFICATION (CONTROL SYSTEMS); TOOLS;

EQUIVALENCE CLASSES;

EID: 33644671129     PISSN: 10705511     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1207/s15328007sem1301_3     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. Card, N. A., & Little, T. D. (2006). Analytic considerations in cross-cultural research on peer relations. In X. Chen, D. C. French, & B. Schneider (Eds.), Peer relations in cultural context (pp. 75-95). New York: Cambridge University Press.
2. Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (1999). Testing factorial invariance across groups: A reconceptualization and proposed new method. Journal of Management, 25, 1-27.
3. Little, T. D. (1997). Mean and covariance structures (MACS) analyses of cross-cultural data: Practical and theoretical issues. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 32, 53-76.
4. Little, T. D., Card, N. A., Siegers, D. W., & Ledford, E. (in press). Representing contextual effects in multiple-group MACS models. In T. D. Little, J. A. Bovaird, & N. A. Card (Eds.), Modeling ecological and contextual effects in longitudinal analyses of human development (pp. xx-xx). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
5. 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.
6. Little, T. D., & Slegers, D. W. (2005). Factor analysis: Multiple groups with means. In B. Everitt & D. Howell (Eds.) & D. Rindskopf (Section Ed.), Encyclopedia of statistics in behavioral science (pp. 617-623). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
7. Meredith, W. (1993). Measurement invariance, factor analysis and factorial invariance. Psychometrika, 58, 525-543.
8. Millsap, R. E. (2001). When trivial constraints are not trivial: The choice of uniqueness constraints in confirmatory factor analysis. Structural Equation Modeling, 8, 1-17.
9. Millsap, R. E., & Everson, H. (1991). Confirmatory measurement model comparisons using latent means. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 26, 479-497.
10. Millsap, R. E., & Kwok, O. M. (2004). Evaluating the impact of partial factorial invariance on selection in two populations. Psychological Methods, 9, 93-115.
11. Nesselroade, J. R. (in press). Factoring at the individual level: Some matters for the second century of factor analysis. In R. C. MacCallum & R. Cudeck (Eds.), 100 years of factor analysis.
12. Rindskopf, D. (1984). Using phantom and imaginary latent variables to parameterize constraints in linear structural models. Psychometrika, 49, 37-47.
13. Reise, S. P., Widaman, K. F., & Pugh, R. H. (1994). Confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory: Two approaches for exploring measurement invariance. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 552-566.
14. Rosenthal, R. (1994). Parametric measures of effect size. In H. Cooper & L. V. Hedges (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis (pp. 231-244). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.