Reporting analyses of covariance structures

Structural Equation Modeling

Volumn 7, Issue 3, 2000, Pages 461-483

  Boomsma, Anne ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GRONINGEN   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33846805404     PISSN: 10705511     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1207/S15328007SEM0703_6     Document Type: Article

References (126)

1. Abelson, R. P. (1995). Statistics as principled argument. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
2. Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 411-423.
3. Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1992). Assumptions and comparative strengths of the two-step approach: Comment on Fornell and Yi. Sociological Methods & Research, 20, 321-333.
4. Arbuckle, J. L. (1996). Full information estimation in the presence of incomplete data. In G. A. Marcoulides & R. E. Schumacker (Eds.), Advanced structural equation modeling: Issues and techniques (pp. 243-277). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
5. Arbuckle, J. L. (1997). Amos user's guide. Version 3.6. Chicago: SPSS.
6. Bagozzi, R. P., & Li, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16, 74-94.
7. Barnett, V., & Lewis, T. (1994). Outliers in statistical data (2nd ed.). Chichester, England: Wiley.
8. Baumgartner, H., & Bagozzi, R. P. (1995). Specification, estimation, and testing of moment structure models based on latent variables involving interactions among exogenous constructs. Sociological Methods, 24, 187-213.
9. Bekker, P. A. (1994). Counting rules for identification in linear structural models. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 18, 485-498.
10. Bekker, P. A., Merckens, A., & Wansbeek, T. J. (1994). Identification, equivalent models, and computer algebra. Boston: Academic.
11. Bentler, P. M. (1980). Multivariate analysis with latent variables: Causal modeling. Annual Review of Psychology, 31, 419-456.
12. Bentler, P. M. (1995). EQSstructural equations program manual. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software.
13. Bentler, P. M., & Yuan, K. -H. (1999). Structural modeling with small samples: Test statistics. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 34, 181-197.
14. Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley.
15. Bollen, K. A., & Long, J. S. (Eds.). (1993). Testing structural equation models. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
16. Boomsma, A. (1985). Nonconvergence, improper solutions, and starting values in LISREL maximum likelihood estimation. Psychometrika, 52, 345-370.
17. Boomsma, A. (1996). De adequaatheid van covariantiestructuurmodellen: een overzicht van maten en indexen [The adequacy of models for covariance structure: An overview of measures and indexes]. Kwantitatieve Methoden, 52, 7-52.
18. Breckler, S. J. (1990). Applications of covariance structure modeling in psychology: Cause for concern? Psychological Bulletin, 107, 260-273.
19. Brown, R. L. (1994). Efficacy of the indirect approach for estimating structural equation models with missing data: A comparison of five methods. Structural Equation Modeling, 1, 287-316.
20. Browne, M. W. (1984). Asymptotically distribution-free methods for the analysis of covariance structures. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 37, 62-83.
21. Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1989). Single sample cross-validation indices for covariance structures. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 24, 445-455.
22. Camstra, A. (1993). The use of cross-validation techniques for model selection in covariance structure analysis. In R. Steyer, K. F. Wender, & K. F. Widaman (Eds.), Psychometric methodology: Proceedings of the 7th European Meeting of the Psychometric Society in Trier (pp. 85-89). Stuttgart: Fischer.
23. Camstra, A. (1998). Cross-validation in covariance structure analysis. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Groningen, The Netherlands.
24. Camstra, A., & Boomsma, A. (1992). Cross-validation in regression and covariance structure analysis: An overview. Sociological Methods & Research, 21, 89-115.
25. Chou, C.-P., & Bentler, P. M. (1995). Estimation and tests in structural equation modeling. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 37-55). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
26. Chou, C.-P., Bentler, P. M., & Satorra, A. (1991). Scaled test statistics and robust standard errors for non-normal data in covariance structure analysis: A Monte Carlo study. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 44, 347-357.
27. Cochran, W. G. (1965). The planning of observational studies of human populations (with discussion). Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A, 128, 234-265.
28. Cox, D. R. (1992). Causality: Some statistical aspects. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A, 155, 291-301.
29. Cox, D. R., & Wermuth, N. (1996). Multivariate dependencies-Models, analysis and interpretation. London: Chapman & Hall.
30. Cudeck, R. (1989). Analysis of correlation matrices using covariance structure models. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 317-327.
31. Cudeck, R., & Browne, M. W. (1983). Cross-validation of covariance structures. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 18, 147-167.
32. Cudeck, R., & O'Dell, L. L. (1994). Applications of standard error estimates in unrestricted factor analysis: Significance tests for factor loadings and correlations. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 475-487.
33. Curran, P. J., West, S. G., & Finch, J. F. (1996). The robustness of test statistics to nonnormality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 1, 16-29.
34. De Gooijer, J. G. (1995). Cross-validation criteria for covariance structures. Communications in Statistics: Part B. Simulation and Computation, 24, 1-16.
35. De Gooijer, J. G., & Koopman, S. J. (1988). Cross-validation criteria and the analysis of covariance structures. In M. G. H. Jansen & W. H. van Schuur (Eds.), The many faces of multivariate analysis: Proceedings of the SMABS-88 Conference (Vol. II, pp. 296-311). Groningen: RION.
36. De Groot, A. D. (1966). Methodologie. Grondslagen van onderzoek en denken in de gedragswetenschappen (derde druk) [Methodology: Foundations of inference and research in the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.)]. 'S-Gravenhage: Mouton.
37. De Groot, A. D. (1969). Methodology: Foundations of inference and research in the behavioral sciences. The Hague: Mouton.
38. Ding, L., Velicer, W. V., & Harlow, L. L. (1995). Effects of estimation methods, number of indicators per factor, and improper solutions on structural equation modeling fit indices. Structural Equation Modeling, 2, 119-143.
39. Duncan, T. E., Duncan, S. C., & Li, F. (1998). Acomparison of model- and multiple imputation-based approaches to longitudinal analyses with partial missingness. Structural Equation Modeling, 5, 1-21.
40. Ernste, H. (Ed.). (1996). Multilevel analysis with structural equation models. Zürich: Gruppe für Quantitative Geographie und Humanökologie, Geographisches Institut ETH.
41. Fan, X., Thompson, B., & Wang, L. (1999). Effects of sample size, estimation methods, and model specification on structural equation modeling fit indexes. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 56-83.
42. Fornell, C., & Yi, Y. (1992a). Assumptions of the two-step approach to latent variable modeling. Sociological Methods & Research, 20, 291-320.
43. Fornell, C., & Yi, Y. (1992b). Assumptions of the two-step approach: Reply to Anderson and Gerbing. Sociological Methods & Research, 20, 334-339.
44. Freedman, D. A. (1997). From association to causation via regression (with discussion). In V. R. McKim & Turner, S. P. (Eds.), Causality in crisis? Statistical methods and the search for causal knowledge in the social sciences (pp. 113-182). Notre Dame, IN: University of NotreDamePress.
45. Goldberger, A. S. (1991). A course in econometrics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
46. Hancock, G. R. (1999). Asequential Scheffe-type respecification procedure for controlling Type I error in exploratory structural equation modification. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 158-168.
47. Hayduk, L. A. (1996). LISREL issues, debates, and strategies. Baltimore, MA: Johns Hopkins University Press.
48. Hayduk, L. A., & Glaser, D. N. (2000). Jiving the four-step, waltzing around factor analysis, and other serious fun (with discussion). Structural Equation Modeling, 7, 1-35.
49. Hershberger, S. L. (1995). The specification of equivalent models before the collection of data. In A. von Eye & C. C. Clogg (Eds.), Latent variable analysis: Applications for developmental research (pp. 68-105). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
50. Hoogland, J. J. (1999). The robustness of estimation methods for covariance structure analysis. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Groningen, The Netherlands.
51. Hoogland, J. J., & Boomsma, A. (1998). Robustness studies in covariance structure modeling: An overview and a meta-analysis. Sociological Methods & Research, 26, 329-367.
52. Hox, J. J. (1994). Applied multilevel analysis. Amsterdam: TT-Publikaties.
53. Hoyle, R. H., & Panter, A. T. (1995). Writing about structural equation models. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 158-176). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
54. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1995). Evaluating model fit. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 76-99). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
55. 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.
56. Hu, L., Bentler, P. M., & Kano, Y. (1992). Can test statistics in covariance structure analysis be trusted? Psychological Bulletin, 112, 351-362.
57. Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1989). LISREL 7: A guide to the program and applications (2nd ed.). Chicago: SPSS.
58. Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1996a). LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language. Chicago: Scientific Software International.
59. Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1996b). LISREL 8: User's reference guide (2nd ed.). Chicago: Scientific Software International.
60. Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1996c). PRELIS 2: User's reference guide (3rd ed.). Chicago: Scientific Software International.
61. Jöreskog, K. G., Sörbom, D., Du Toit, S., & Du Toit, M. (1999). LISREL 8: New statistical features. Chicago: Scientific Software International.
62. Kaplan, D. W. (1989). A study of the sampling variability and z-values of parameter estimates from misspecified structural equation models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 24, 41-57.
63. Kaplan, D. (1990). Evaluating and modifying covariance structure models:Areview and recommendation (with discussion). Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 137-155.
64. Kaplan, D. (1991). On the modification and predictive validity of covariance structure models. Quality & Quantity, 25, 307-314.
65. Kaplan, D. (1995). Statistical power in structural equation modeling. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 100-117). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
66. Kaplan, D., & Elliott, P. R. (1997). A model-based approach to validating education indicators using multilevel structural equation modeling. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 22, 323-347.
67. Kaplan, D., & Wenger, R. N. (1993). Asymptotic independence and separability in covariance structure models: Implications for specification error, power, and model modification. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 28, 467-482.
68. Little, R. J. A., & Rubin, D. B. (1987). Statistical analysis with missing data. New York: Wiley.
69. Little, R. J. A., & Rubin, D. B. (1990). The analysis of social science data with missing data. Sociological Methods & Research, 18, 292-326.
70. Luijben, T. C. W. (1989). Statistical guidance for model modification in covariance structure analysis. Amsterdam: Sociometric Research Foundation (Doctoral dissertation, University of Groningen, The Netherlands).
71. Luijben, T. C. W., & Boomsma, A. (1988). Statistical guidance for model modification in covariance structure analysis. In D. Edwards & N. E. Raun (Eds.),COMPSTAT1988: Proceedings in Computational Statistics (pp. 335-340). Heidelberg: Physica.
72. MacCallum, R. C. (1986). Specification searches in covariance structure modeling. Psychological Bulletin, 100, 107-120.
73. 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.
74. MacCallum, R. C., Roznowski, M., Mar, C. M., & Reith, J. V. (1994). Alternative strategies for cross-validation of covariance structure models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 29, 1-32.
75. MacCallum, R. C., Roznowski, M., & Necowitz, L. B. (1992). Model modifications in covariance structure analysis: The problem of capitalization on chance. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 490-504.
76. MacCallum, R. C., Wegener, D. T., Uchino, B. N., & Fabrigar, L. R. (1993). The problem of equivalent models in applications of covariance structure analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 185-199.
77. Marsh, H. W. (1998). Pairwise deletion for missing data in structural equation models: Nonpositive definite matrices, parameter estimates, goodness of fit, and adjusted sample sizes. Structural Equation Modeling, 5, 22-36.
78. Marsh, H. W., & Balla, J. R. (1994). Goodness of fit in confirmatory factor analysis: The effects of sample size and parsimony. Quality & Quantity, 28, 185-217.
79. Marsh, H. W., Balla, J. R., & Hau, K.-T. (1996). An evaluation of incremental fit indexes:Aclarification of mathematical and empirical properties. In G. A. Marcoulides & R. E. Schumacker (Eds.), Advanced structural equation modeling: Issues and techniques (pp. 315-353). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
80. Marsh, H. W., & Hau, K.-T. (1996). Assessing goodness of fit: Is parsimony always desirable? The Journal of Experimental Education, 64, 364-390.
81. Marsh, H. W., & Hau, K.-T. (1999). Confirmatory factor analysis: Strategies for small sample sizes. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Statistical strategies for small sample size (pp. 251-306). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
82. Marsh, H. W., Hau, K.-T., Balla, J. R., & Grayson, D. (1998). Is more ever too much? The number of indicators per factor in confirmatory factor analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 33, 181-220.
83. Maxwell, S. E., & Cole, D. A. (1995). Tips for writing (and reading) methodological articles. Psychological Bulletin, 118, 193-198.
84. McArdle, J. J., & Hamagami, F. (1996). Multilevel models from a multiple group structural equation perspective. In G. A. Marcoulides & R.A. Schumacker (Eds.), Advanced structural equation modeling: Issues and techniques (pp. 89-124). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
85. Mulaik, S. A., & Millsap, R. E. (2000). Doing the four-step right. Structural Equation Modeling, 7, 36-73.
86. Muthén, B. O. (1994). Multilevel covariance structure analysis. Sociological Methods & Research, 22, 376-398.
87. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998). Mplus user's guide. Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén.
88. Neale, M. C. (1994). Mx: Statistical modeling (2nd ed.). Richmond, VA: Medical College of Virginia, Department of Psychiatry.
89. O'Grady, K. E. (1982). Measures of explained variance: Cautions and limitations. Psychological Bulletin, 92, 766-777.
90. Popper, K. (1974). Conjectures and refutations: The growth of scientific knowledge (5th ed.). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
91. Popper, K. (1983). Realism and the aim of science. (W. W. Bartley III, Ed.). [Post-script to The logic of scientific discovery (Vol. 1)]. London: Hutchinson.
92. Publication manual of the American Psychological Association. (4th ed.). (1994). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
93. Raykov, T. (1997). Estimation of composite reliability for congeneric measures. Applied Psychological Measurement, 21, 173-184.
94. Raykov, T., Tomer, A., & Nesselroade, J. R. (1991). Reporting structural equation modeling results in Psychology and Aging: Some proposed guidelines. Psychology and Aging, 6, 499-533.
95. Rindskopf, D. (1984). Structural equation models: Empirical identification, Heywood cases, and related problems. Sociological Methods & Research, 13, 109-119.
96. Rosenbaum, P. R. (1995). Observational studies. New York: Springer.
97. Rubin, D. B. (1987). Multiple imputation for nonresponse in surveys. New York: Wiley.
98. Rubin, D. B. (1996). Multiple imputation after 18+ years. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 91, 473-489.
99. Saris, W. E., & Satorra, A. (1987). Characteristics of structural equation models which affect the power of the likelihood ratio test. In W. E. Saris & I.N. Gallhofer (Eds.), Sociometric research (Vol. 2., pp. 220-236). London: Macmillan.
100. Saris, W. E., & Satorra, A. (1993). Power evaluations in structural equation models. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 181-204). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
101. Saris, W. E., Satorra, A., & Sörbom, D. (1987). The detection and correction of specification errors in structural equation models. In C. C. Clogg (Ed.), Sociological methodology 1987 (pp. 105-129). Washington, DC: The American Sociological Association.
102. Saris, W. E., & Stronkhorst, H. (1984). Causal modelling in nonexperimental research: An introduction to the LISREL approach. Amsterdam: Sociometric Research Foundation.
103. Satorra, A. (1990). Robustness issues in structural equation modeling:Areview of recent developments. Quality & Quantity, 24, 367-386.
104. Satorra, A. (1992). Asymptotic robust inferences in the analysis of mean and covariance structures. In P. V. Marsden (Ed.), Sociological Methodology 1992. Oxford, England: Blackwell.
105. Satorra, A. (1993). Multi-sample analysis of moment structures: Asymptotic validity of inferences based on second order moments. In K. Haagen, D. J. Bartholomew, & M. Deistler (Eds.), Statistical modelling and latent variables (pp. 283-298). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
106. Satorra, A., & Bentler, P. M. (1994). Corrections to test statistics and standard errors in covariance structure analysis. In A. von Eye & C. C. Clogg (Eds.), Latent variable analysis: Applications for developmental research (pp. 399-419). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
107. Satorra, A., & Saris, W. E. (1985). The power of the likelihood ratio test in covariance structure analysis. Psychometrika, 50, 83-90.
108. Schafer, J. L. (1996). Analysis of incomplete multivariate data. London: Chapman & Hall.
109. Scheines, R., Spirtes, P., Glymour, C., & Meek, C. (1994). TETRAD II: Tools for causal modeling. User's manual. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
110. Scheines, R., Spirtes, P., Glymour, C., Meek, C., & Richardson, T. (1998). The TETRAD project: Constraint based aids to causal model specification (with discussion). Multivariate Behavioral Research, 33, 65-117.
111. Silvia, E. S. M., & MacCallum, R. C. (1988). Some factors affecting the success of specification searches in covariance structure modeling. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 23, 297-326.
112. Sobel, M. E. (1994). Causal inference in latent variable models. In A. von Eye & C. C. Clogg (Eds.), Latent variables analysis: Applications for developmental research (pp. 3-35). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
113. Sobel, M. E. (1995). Causal inference in the social and behavioral sciences. In G. Arminger, C. C. Clogg, & M. E. Sobel (Eds.), Handbook of statistical modeling for the social and behavioral sciences (pp. 1-38). New York: Plenum.
114. Sobel, M. E. (1996). An introduction to causal inference. Sociological Methods & Research, 24, 353-379.
115. Steiger, J. H. (1990). Structural model evaluation and modification: An interval estimation approach. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 173-180.
116. Stelzl, I. (1986). Changing a causal hypothesis without changing the fit: Some rules for generating equivalent path models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 21, 309-331.
117. Verleye, G. (1996). Missing at random data problems in attitude measurement using maximum likelihood structural equation modelling. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Faculteit Psychologie en Opvoedkunde.
118. Verschuren, P. J. M. (1991). Structurele modellen tussen theorie en praktijk [Structural models between theory and practice]. Utrecht: Het Spectrum.
119. West, S. G., Finch, J. F., & Curran, P. J. (1995). Structural equation modeling with nonnormal variables: Problems and remedies. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 56-75). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
120. Williams, L. J., Bozdogan, H., & Aiman-Smith, L. (1996). Inference problems with equivalent models. In G. A. Marcoulides & R. E. Schumacker (Eds.), Advanced structural equation modeling: Issues and techniques (pp. 279-314). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
121. Yang Jonsson, F. (1997). Non-linear structural equation models: Simulation studies of the Kenny-Judd model (Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis. Studia Statistica Upsaliensia 4). Doctoral dissertation, University of Uppsala, Department of Statistics.
122. Yuan, K.-H., & Bentler, P. M. (1995). Robust methods for mean and covariance structure analysis (UCLA Statistical Series, No. 195). Los Angeles: University of California.
123. Yuan, K.-H., & Bentler, P. M. (1997). Mean and covariance structure analysis: Theoretical and practical improvements. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 92, 767-774.
124. Yuan, K.-H., & Bentler, P. M. (1998a). Normal theory based test statistics in structural equation modelling. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 51, 289-309.
125. Yuan, K.-H., & Bentler, P. M. (1998b). Robust mean and covariance structure analysis. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 51, 63-88.
126. Yuan, K.-H., & Bentler, P. M. (1998c). Structural equation modeling with robust covariances. In A. E. Raftery (Ed.), Sociological methodology 1998 (pp. 363-396). Oxford, England: Blackwell.