Three approaches to using lengthy ordinal scales in structural equation models: Parceling, latent scoring, and shortening scales

Applied Psychological Measurement

Volumn 34, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 122-142

  Yang, Chongming ^a   Nay, Sandra ^a   Hoyle, Rick H ^a  

^a DUKE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Growth modeling; Latent scores; Scale length; Structural equation modeling; Testlets

Indexed keywords

EID: 77649264954     PISSN: 01466216     EISSN: 15523497     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0146621609338592     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Achenbach, T.M. (1978). Child-Behavior Profile I. Boys aged 6-11. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 46, 478-488.
2. Alhija, F.N., & Wisenbaker, J. (2006). A Monte Carlo study investigating the impact of item parceling strategies on parameter estimates and their standard errors in CFA. Structural Equation Modeling, 13, 204-228.
3. Anderson, J.C., & Gerbing, D.W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411-423.
4. Bandalos, D.L. (2002). The effects of item parceling on goodness-of-fit and parameter estimate bias in structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 78-102.
5. Bandalos, D.L., & Finney, S.J. (2001). Item parceling issues in structural equation modeling. In G. A. Marcoulides & R. E. Schumacker (Eds.), New developments and techniques in structural equation modeling (pp. 269-275). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
6. Bollen, K., & Lennox, R. (1991). Conventional wisdom on measurement: A structural equation perspective. Psychological Bulletin, 110, 305-314.
7. Cattell, R.J. (1956). Validation and intensification of the sixteen personality factor questionnaire. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 12, 205-214.
8. Cattell, R.J., & Burdsal, C.A., Jr. (1975). The radial parceling double factoring design: A solution to the item-vs.-parcel controversy. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 10, 165-179.
9. Coanders, G., Satorra, A., & Saris, W.E. (1997). Alternative approaches to structural equation modeling of ordinal data: A Monte Carlo study. Structural Equation Modeling, 4, 261-282.
10. Embretson, S.E. (1996). Item response theory and inferential bias in multiple group comparisons. Applied Psychological Measurement, 20, 201-212.
11. Fletcher, T.D. (2005). The effects of parcels and latent variable scores on the detection of interactions in structural equation modeling. Dissertation Abstracts International: 66-5B, 2872.
12. Ferrando, P. (2009). Difficulty, discrimination, and information indices in the linear factor analysis model for continuous item responses. Applied Psychological Measurement, 33(1), 9-24.
13. Guttman, L. (1955). The determinacy of factor score matrices with implications for five other basic problems of common-factor theory. British Journal of Statistical Psychology, 8, 65-81.
14. Hall, R.J., Snell, A.F., & Foust, M.S. (1999). Item parceling strategies in SEM: Investigating the subtle effects of unmodeled secondary constructs. Organizational Research Methods, 2, 757-765.
15. Hambleton, R.K., Swaminathan, H., & Rogers, H.J. (1991). Fundamentals of item response theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
16. Hau, K.T., & Marsh, H.W. (2004). The use of item parcels in structural equation modeling: Non-normal data and small sample sizes. British Journal of Mathematical Statistical Psychology, 57, 327-351.
17. Kenny, D.A. (1979). Correlation and causality. New York: John Wiley.
18. Kishton, J.M., & Widaman, K.F. (1994). Unidimensional versus domain representative parceling of questionnaire items: An empirical example. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54, 757-765.
19. Lansford, J.E., Malone, P.S., Dodge, K.A., Crozier, J.C., Pettit, G.S., & Bates, J.E. (2006). A 12-year prospective study of patterns of social information processing problems and externalizing behaviors. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 34, 715-724.
20. Little, T.D., Cunningham, W.A., Shahar, G., & Widaman, K.F. (2002). To parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the questions, weighing the merits. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 151-173.
21. Little, T.D., Lindenberger, U., & Nesselroade, J.R. (1999). On selecting indicators for multivariate measurement and modeling with latent variables: When "good" indicators are bad and "bad" indicators are good. Psychological Methods, 4, 192-211.
22. Marsh, H.W., Hau, K., Balla, J.R., & Grayson, D. (1998). Is more ever too much? The number of indicators per factor in confirmatory factory analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 33, 181-220.
23. Marsh, H.W., & O'Neill, R. (1984). Self Description Questionnaire III: The construct validity of multidimensional self-concept ratings by late adolescents. Journal of Educational Measurement, 21, 153-174.
24. McDonald, R.P. (1996). Latent traits and the possibility of motion. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 31, 593-601.
25. Moore, K.A., Halle, T.G., Vandivere, S., & Marina, C.L. (2002). Scaling back survey scales: How short is short? Sociological Research Methods, 30, 530-567.
26. Muthén, B. (1984). A general structural equation model with dichotomous, ordered categorical and continuous latent variable indicators. Psychometrika, 49, 115-132.
27. Muthén, B., & Kaplan, D. (1985). A comparison of some methodologies for the factor analysis of non-normal Likert variables. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 38, 171-189.
28. Muthén, B., & Kaplan, D. (1992). A comparison of some methodologies for the factor analysis of non-normal Likert variables: A note on the size of the model. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 45, 19-30.
29. Muthén, B.O., & Muthén, L.K. (2002). How to use a Monte Carlo study to decide on sample size and determine power. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 599-620.
30. Muthén, L.K., & Muthén, B.O. (1998-2006). Mplus user's guide (4th ed.). Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén.
31. Muthén, L.K., & Muthén, B.O. (2006). IRT in Mplus. Retrieved December 06, 2008, from http://www.statmodel.com/download/MplusIRT1.pdf.
32. Nasser, F., & Wisenbaker, J. (2003). A Monte Carlo study investigating the impact of item parceling on measures of fit in confirmatory factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 63, 729-757.
33. Paxton, P., Curran, P.J., Bollen, K.A., Kirby, J., & Chen, F. (2001). Monte Carlo experiments: Design and implementation. Structural Equation Modeling, 8, 287-312.
34. Reise, S.P., Widaman, K.F., & Pugh, R.H. (1993). Confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory: Two approaches for exploring measurement invariance. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 552-566.
35. Reise, S.P., & Yu, J. (1990). Parameter recovery in the graded response model using MULTILOG. Journal of Educational Measurement, 65, 143-151.
36. Samejima, F. (1969). Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores. Psychometrika Monograph, No. 17.
37. Sass, D.A., & Smith, P.L. (2006). The effects of parceling unidimensional scales on structural parameter estimates in structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 13, 566-586.
38. Shevlin, M., Miles, J.N.V., & Bunting, B.P. (1997). Summated rating scales: A Monte Carlo investigation of the effects of reliability and collinearity in regression models. Personality and Individual Differences, 23, 665-676.
39. Stephenson, M.T., Hoyle, R.H., Palmgreen, P., & Slater, M.D. (2003). Brief measures of sensation seeking for screening and large-scale surveys. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 72, 279-286.
40. Takane, Y., & de Leeuw, J. (1987). On the relationship between item response theory and factor analysis of discretized variables. Psychometrika, 52, 393-408.
41. Wright, B.D. (1999). Fundamental measurement for psychology. In S. E. Embretson & S. L. Hershberger (Eds.), The new rules of measurement: What every psychologist and educator should know (pp. 65-104). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.