On tests and indices for evaluating structural models

Personality and Individual Differences

Volumn 42, Issue 5, 2007, Pages 825-829

  Bentler, Peter M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Approximate fit; Comparative fit index; Model modification; RMSEA; Test statistic

Indexed keywords

EID: 33846807786     PISSN: 01918869     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.paid.2006.09.024     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Bentler P.M. Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin 107 (1990) 238-246
2. Bentler P.M. EQS structural equations program manual (1995), Multivariate Software, Encino, CA
3. Bentler, P. M. (in press). EQS 6 structural equations program manual. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software.
4. Bentler P.M., and Bonett D.G. Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin 88 (1980) 588-606
5. Browne M.W., and Cudeck R. Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In: Bollen K.A., and Long J.S. (Eds). Testing structural equation models (1993), Sage, Newbury Park, CA 136-162
6. Browne M.W., MacCallum R.C., Kim C.-T., Anderson B., and Glaser R. When fit indices and residuals are incompatible. Psychological Methods 7 (2002) 403-421
7. Curran P.J., West S.G., and Finch J.F. The robustness of test statistics to nonnormality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis. Psychological Methods 1 (1996) 16-29
8. de Leeuw J. Model selection in multinomial experiments. In: Dijkstra T.K. (Ed). On model uncertainty and its statistical implications (1988), Springer, Berlin 118-138
9. Hu L.-T., and Bentler P.M. Evaluating model fit. In: Hoyle R.H. (Ed). Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues and applications (1995), Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA 76-99
10. Hu L., Bentler P.M., and Kano Y. Can test statistics in covariance structure analysis be trusted?. Psychological Bulletin 112 (1992) 351-362
11. Jöreskog K.G., and Sörbom D. Recent developments in structural equation modeling. Journal of Marketing Research 19 (1982) 404-416
12. Lee S.-Y., Poon W.-Y., and Bentler P.M. A two-stage estimation of structural equation models with continuous and polytomous variables. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology 48 (1995) 339-358
13. MacCallum R.C. Working with imperfect models. Multivariate Behavioral Research 38 (2003) 113-139
14. MacCallum R.C., Roznowski M., and Necowitz L.B. Model modification in covariance structure analysis: The problem of capitalization on chance. Psychological Bulletin 111 (1992) 490-504
15. 2(dif) to assess relative model fit in categorical data analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research 41 (2006) 55-64
16. McDonald R.P., and Ho M.-H.R. Principles and practice in reporting structural equation analyses. Psychological Methods 7 (2002) 64-82
17. Schilling S., and Bock R.D. High-dimensional maximum marginal likelihood item factor analysis by adaptive quadrature. Psychometrika 70 (2005) 1-23
18. Stout W.F. A new item response theory modeling approach with applications to unidimensionality assessment and ability estimation. Psychometrika 55 (1990) 293-325
19. Yuan K.-H., and Bentler P.M. On chi-square difference and z-tests in mean and covariance structure analysis when the base model is misspecified. Educational and Psychological Measurement 64 (2004) 737-757
20. Yuan, K.-H., & Bentler, P. M. (in press-a). Structural equation modeling. In C. R. Rao & S. Sinharay (Eds.), Handbook of statistics: Psychometrics. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
21. Yuan, K.-H., & Bentler, P. M. (in press-b). Robust procedures in structural equation modeling. In S.-Y. Lee (Ed.). Handbook of structural equation models. Amsterdam: Elsevier.