Structural equations modeling: Fit Indices, sample size, and advanced topics

Journal of Consumer Psychology

Volumn 20, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 90-98

  Iacobucci, Dawn ^a  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Factor analysis; Fit indices; Path models; Statistical methods; Structural equations models

Indexed keywords

EID: 75349090894     PISSN: 10577408     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcps.2009.09.003     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Anderson J.C., and Gerbing D.W. The effect of sampling error on convergence, improper solutions, and goodness-of-fit indices for maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analysis. Psychometrika 49 (1984) 155-173
2. Anderson J.C., and Gerbing D.W. Predicting the performance of measures in a confirmatory factor analysis with a pretest assessment of their substantive validities. Journal of Applied Psychology 76 5 (1991) 732-740
3. Bagozzi R. On the meaning of formative measurement and how it differs from reflective measurement: Commentary on Howell, Breivik, and Wilcox. Psychological Methods 12 2 (2007) 229-237
4. Bearden W.O., Sharma S., and Teel J.E. Sample size effects on chi square and other statistics used in evaluating causal models. Journal of Marketing Research 19 Nov. (1982) 425-430
5. Bentler P.M. Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin 107 2 (1990) 238-246
6. Bentler P.M., and Bonett D.G. Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin 88 3 (1980) 588-606
7. Bollen K.A. Overall fit in covariance structure models: Two types of sample size effects. Psychological Bulletin 107 2 (1990) 256-259
8. Browne M.W., MacCallum R.C., Kim C.T., Andersen B.L., and Glaser R. When fit indices and residuals are incompatible. Psychological Methods 7 4 (2002) 403-421
9. Ding L., Velicer W.F., and Harlow L.L. Effects of estimation methods, number of indicators per factor, and improper solutions on structural equation modeling fit indices. Structural Equation Modeling 2 2 (1995) 119-144
10. Dijkstra T. Some comments on maximum likelihood and partial least squares methods. Journal of Econometrics 22 (1983) 67-90
11. Ethington C.A. The robustness of Lisrel estimates in structural equation models with categorical variables. Journal of Experimental Education 55 2 (1987) 80-88
12. Fan X., and Sivo S.A. Sensitivity of fit indexes to misspecified structural or measurement model components. Structural Equation Modeling 12 3 (2005) 343-367
13. Finch J.F., West S.G., and MacKinnon D.P. Effect of sample size and nonnormality on the estimation of mediated effects in latent variable models. Structural Equation Modeling 4 2 (1997) 87-107
14. Fornell C., and Bookstein F.L. Two structural equation models: Lisrel and PLS applied to consumer exit-voice theory. Journal of Marketing Research 19 Nov. (1982) 440-452
15. Franke G.R., Preacher K.J., and Rigdon E.E. The proportional structural effects of formative indicators. Journal of Business Research 61 12 (2008) 1229-1237
16. Gerbing D.W., and Anderson J.C. Monte Carlo evaluations of goodness of fit indices for structural equation models. Sociological Methods and Research 21 2 (1992) 132-160
17. Gerbing D.W., and Anderson J.C. The effects of sampling error and model characteristics on parameter estimation for maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research 20 (1985) 255-271
18. Gerbing D.W., and Anderson J.C. On the meaning of within-factor correlated measurement errors. Journal of Consumer Research 11 1 (1984) 572-580
19. Grewal R., Cote J.A., and Baumgartner H. Multicollinearity and measurement error in structural equation models: Implications for theory testing. Marketing Science 23 4 (2004) 519-529
20. Howell R.D., Breivik E., and Wilcox J.B. Reconsidering formative measurement. Psychological Methods 12 2 (2007) 205-218
21. Hu L., 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
22. Hu L., and Bentler P.M. Fit indexes in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods 3 4 (1998) 424-453
23. Hu L., Bentler P.M., and Kano Y. Can test statistics in covariance Structure analysis be trusted?. Psychological Bulletin 112 2 (1992) 351-362
24. Iacobucci D. Mediation analysis (2008), Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA
25. Jackson D.L. Revisiting sample size and number of parameter estimates: Some support for the N:q hypothesis. Structural Equation Modeling 10 1 (2003) 128-141
26. Kenny D.A., and McCoach B.D. Effect of the number of variables on measures of fit in structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling 10 3 (2003) 333-351
27. Kim K. The relation among fit indexes, power, and sample size in structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling 12 3 (2005) 368-390
28. Kline R.B. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling 2nd ed (2004), Guildford, New York
29. Lei M., and Lomax R.G. The effect of varying degrees of nonnormality in structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling 12 1 (2005) 1-27
30. MacCallum R.C., Browne M.W., and Li C. Testing differences between nested covariance structure models: Power analysis and null hypotheses. Psychological Methods 11 1 (2006) 19-35
31. In: Marcoulides G.A., and Schumacker R.E. (Eds). Advanced structural equation modeling: Issues and techniques (1996), Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ
32. Marsh H.W., Hau K.-T., and Wen Z. In search of golden rules. Structural Equation Modeling 11 3 (2004) 320-341
33. Marsh H.W., Balla J.R., and McDonald R. Goodness-of-fit indexes in confirmatory factor analysis: The effect of sample size. Psychological Bulletin 103 (1988) 391-410
34. McDonald R.P. Path analysis with composite variables. Multivariate Behavioral Research 31 2 (1996) 239-270
35. Muthén B.O. A general structural equation model with dichotomous, ordered categorical, and continuous latent variable indicators. Psychometrika 49 1 (1984) 115-132
36. Olsson U.H., Foss T., Troye S.V., and Howell R.D. The performance of ML, GLS, and WLS estimation in structural equation modeling under conditions of misspecification and nonnormality. Structural Equation Modeling 7 4 (2000) 557-595
37. Rigdon E.E. CFI versus RMSEA: A comparison of two fit indexes for structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling 3 4 (1996) 369-379
38. Schumacker R.E., and Beyerlein S.T. Confirmatory factor analysis with different correlation types and estimation methods. Structural Equation Modeling 7 4 (2000) 629-636
39. 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 2 (2000) 149-162