Effect of variable and subject sampling on recovery of weak factors in CFA

Methodology

Volumn 3, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 67-80

  Ximénez, Carmen ^a  

^a UNIVERSIDAD AUTÓNOMA DE MADRID   (Spain)

Author keywords

Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA); Monte Carlo simulation; Recovery of weak factors; Variable and subject sampling

Indexed keywords

EID: 69949100879     PISSN: 16141881     EISSN: 16142241     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1027/1614-2241.3.2.67     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Anderson, J.C., & Gerbing, D.W. (1984). The effect of sampling error on convergence, improper solutions, and goodness-of-fit indices for maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analysis. Psychometrika, 49, 155-173.
2. Boomsma, A. (1982) The robustness of LISREL against small sample sizes in factor analysis models. In K.G. Jöreskog & H. Wold (Eds.), Systems under indirect observation: Causality, structure, prediction (Part I, pp. 148-173). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
3. Briggs, N.E., & MacCallum, R.C. (2003). Recovery of weak common factors by maximumlikelihood and ordinary least squares estimation. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 38, 25-56.
4. Gerbing, D.W., & Anderson, J.C. (1985). The effects of sampling error and model characteristics on parameter estimation for maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 20, 255-271.
5. Goodman, L.A. (1971). The analysis of multidimensional contingency tables: Stepwise procedures and direct estimation methods for building models for multiple classifications. Technometrics, 13, 33-61.
6. Guadagnoli, E., & Velicer, W.F. (1988). The relationship of sample size to the stability of patterns. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 265-275.
7. Holzinger, K., & Swineford, F. (1939). A study in factor analysis: The stability of a bifactor solution. Supplementary Educational Monograph, 48. Chicago: University of Chicago press.
8. Jöreskog, K.G. (1967). Some contributions to maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 32, 443-482.
9. Jöreskog, K.G.,& Sörbom, D. (1981). LISREL: Analysis of linear structural relationships by the method of maximum likelihood (version V). Chicago: National Educational Resources, Inc.
10. Jöreskog, K.G., & Sörbom, D. (1996a). LISREL 8: User's reference guide (2nd ed.). Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International.
11. Jöreskog, K.G., & Sörbom, D. (1996b). PRELIS 2: User's reference guide (3rd ed.). Chicago, IL: Scientific Software International.
12. Levine, M.S. (1977). Canonical correlation analysis and factor comparison techniques. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
13. MacCallum, R.C., & Tucker, L.R. (1991). Representing sources of error in the common factor model: Implications for theory and practice. Psychological Bulletin, 109, 501-511.
14. MacCallum, R.C., Widaman, K.F., Preacher, K.J., & Hong, S. (2001). Sample size in factor analysis: The role of model error. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 36, 611-637.
15. MacCallum, R.C.,Widaman, K.F., Zhang, S., & Hong, S. (1999). Sample size in factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 4, 84-99.
16. McDonald, R.P., & Krane, W.R. (1977). A note on local identifiability and degrees of freedom in the asymptotic likelihood ratio test. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 30, 198-203.
17. McDonald, R.P., & Krane, W.R. (1979). A Monte Carlo study of local identifiability and degrees of freedom in the asymptotic likelihood ratio test. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 32, 121-132.
18. Morrison, D.F. (1990). Multivariate statistical methods. New York: McGraw-Hill.
19. Olsson, U.H., Troye, S.V., & Howell, R.D. (1999). Theoretical fit and empirical fit: The performance of maximum likelihood versus generalized least squares estimation in structural equation models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 34, 31-58.
20. Rindskopf, D. (1984). Structural equation models: Empirical identification, Heywood cases, and related problems. Sociological Methods and Research, 13, 109-119.
21. Skrondal, A. (2000). Design and analysis of Monte Carlo experiments: Attacking the conventional wisdom. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 35, 137-167.
22. Tucker, L.R. (1951). A method for synthesis of factor analysis studies (Technical report 984). Washington, DC: Department of the Army.
23. Van Driel, O.P. (1978). On various causes of improper solutions in maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 43, 225-243.
24. Velicer,W.F., & Fava, J.L. (1987). An evaluation of the effects of variable sampling on component, image, and factor analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 22, 193-210.
25. Velicer,W.F., & Fava, J.L. (1998). Effects of variable and subject sampling on factor pattern recovery. Psychological Methods, 3, 231-251.
26. Ximénez, C. (2006). A Monte Carlo study of recovery of weak factor loadings in confirmatory factor analysis. Structural Equation Modeling, 13, 587-614.