Understanding the limitations of global fit assessment in structural equation modeling

Personality and Individual Differences

Volumn 42, Issue 5, 2007, Pages 893-898

  Steiger, James H ^a  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Confidence interval estimation; Fit indices; Hypothesis testing; Structural equation modeling

Indexed keywords

EID: 33846817445     PISSN: 01918869     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.paid.2006.09.017     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Barrett P. Structural equation modelling: adjudging model fit. Personality and Individual Differences 42 5 (2007) 815-824 10.1016/j.paid.2006.09.018
2. Cliff N. Some cautions concerning the application of causal modeling methods. Multivariate Behavioral Research 18 (1983) 115-126
3. Guttman L. A new approach to factor analysis: the radex. In: Lazarsfeld P.F. (Ed). Mathematical thinking in the social sciences (1954), Columbia University Press, New York
4. Holzinger, K. J., & Swineford, F. (1939). A study in factor analysis: the stability of a bi-factor solution. In Supplementary Educational Monograph No. 48 (p. 91). Chicago: University of Chicago Department of Education.
5. Hu L.-T., and Bentler P.M. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling 6 1 (1999) 1-55
6. Jöreskog K.G. Structural analysis of covariance and correlation matrices. Psychometrika 43 (1978) 443-477
7. MacCallum R.C., Browne M.W., and Sugawara H.M. Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods 1 (1996) 130-149
8. Marsh H.W., Hau K.-T., and Grayson D. Goodness of fit in structural equation models. In: Maydeu-Olivares A., and McArdle J.J. (Eds). Contemporary psychometrics (2005), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ
9. Serlin R.A., and Lapsley D.K. Rational appraisal of psychological research and the good-enough principle. In: Keren G., and Lewis C. (Eds). A handbook for data analysis in the behavioral sciences: methodological issues (1993), Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ 199-228
10. Smithson M. Correct confidence intervals for various regression effect sizes and parameters: the importance of noncentral distributions in computing intervals. Educational Psychological Measurement 61 (2001) 603-630
11. Steiger J.H. Point estimation, hypothesis testing, and interval estimation using the RMSEA: some comments and a reply to Hayduk and Glaser. Structural Equation Modeling 7 (2000) 149-162
12. Steiger J.H. Beyond the F-test: effect size confidence intervals and tests of close fit in the analysis of variance and contrast analysis. Psychological Methods 9 (2004) 164-182
13. Steiger, J. H. (2006). Things we could have known: some thoughts on seeing the future and avoiding regret in data analysis and model selection. Keynote address at the annual international meeting of the psychometric society, Montreal, June 14, 2006.
14. Steiger J.H., and Fouladi R.T. Noncentrality interval estimation and the evaluation of statistical models. In: Harlow L.L., Mulaik S.A., and Steiger J.H. (Eds). What if there were no significance tests? (1997), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ
15. Steiger, J.H.,& Lind, J.C. (1980). Statistically-based tests for the number of common factors. Paper presented at the annual spring meeting of the psychometric society in Iowa city. May 30, 1980.
16. Tucker L.R., and Lewis C. A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika 38 (1973) 1-10
17. Westlake W.J. Symmetrical confidence intervals for bioequivalence trials. Biometrics 32 (1976) 741-744