Estimating latent variable interactions with the unconstrained approach: A comparison of methods to form product indicators for large, unequal numbers of items

Structural Equation Modeling

Volumn 18, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 274-288

  Jackman, M Grace Anne ^a   Leite, Walter L ^a   Cochrane, David J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA   (United States)

Author keywords

Latent moderated structural equations (LMS); Latent variable interactions; Monte carlo simulation study; Structural equation modeling; Unconstrained approach

Indexed keywords

EID: 79957802877     PISSN: 10705511     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10705511.2011.557342     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Algina, J., & Moulder, B. C. (2001). A note on estimating the Jöreskog-Yang model using LISREL. Structural Equation Modeling, 8, 40-52.
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. 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.
4. 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. 269-296). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
5. Bauer, D. J. (2005). A semiparametric approach to modeling nonlinear relations among latent variables. Structural Equation Modeling, 12, 513-535.
6. Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York, NY: Wiley.
7. Chou, C. P., Bentler, P. M., & Satorra, A. (1991). Scaled test statistics and robust standard errors for non-normal data in covariance structure analysis: A Monte Carlo study. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 44, 347-357.
8. Cortina, J. M., Chen, G., & Dunlap, W. P. (2001). Testing interaction effects in LISREL: Examination and illustration of available procedures. Organizational Research Methods, 4, 324-360.
9. Cummings, E. M., Schermerhorn, A. C., Davies, P. T., Goeke-Morey, M. C., & Cummings, J. S. (2006). Interparental discord and child adjustment: Prospective investigations of emotional security as an explanatory mechanism. Child Development, 77, 132-152.
10. Curran, P. J., West, S. G., & Finch, J. F. (1996). The robustness of test statistics to non-normality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 1, 16-29.
11. Fan, X., & Wang, L. (1998). Effects of potential confounding factors on fit indices and parameter estimates for true and misspecified models. Structural Equation Modeling, 5, 701-735.
12. Finch, J. F., West, S. G., & MacKinnon, D. P. (1997). Effects of sample size and nonnormality on the estimation of mediated effects in latent variable models. Structural Equation Modeling, 4, 87-105.
13. Fischer, S., & Smith, G. T. (2008). Binge eating, problem drinking, and pathological gambling: Linking behavior to shared traits and social learning. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 789-800.
14. Hau, K., & Marsh, H. W. (2004). The use of item parcels in structural equation modelling: Non-normal data and small sample sizes. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 57, 327-351.
15. Hoogland, J. J., & Boomsma, A. (1998). Robustness studies in covariance structure modeling. Sociological Methods and Research, 26(3), 329-367.
16. Hu, L., Bentler, P. M., & Kano, Y. (1992). Can test statistics in covariance structure analysis be trusted? Psychological Bulletin, 112, 351-362.
17. Jaccard, J., & Wan, C. K. (1995).Measurement error in the analysis of interaction effects between continuous predictors using multiple regression: Multiple indicators and structural equation approaches. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 349-357.
18. Jöreskog, K. G. (1998). Interaction and non-linear modeling: Issues and approaches. In R. E. Schumacker & G. A. Marcoulides (Eds.), Interaction and nonlinear effects in structural equation modeling (pp. 239-250). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
19. Jöreskog, K. G., & Yang, F. (1996). Nonlinear structural equation models: The Kenny-Judd model with interaction effects. In G. A. Marcoulides & R. E. Schumacker (Eds.), Advanced structural equation modeling techniques (pp. 57-88). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
20. Kenny, D. A., & Judd, C. M. (1984). Estimating the nonlinear and interactive effects of latent variables. Psychological Bulletin, 96, 201-210.
21. 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.
22. Klein, A., & Moosbrugger, H. (2000). Maximum likelihood estimation of latent interaction effects with the LMS method. Psychometrika, 65, 457-474.
23. Little, T. D., Bovaird, J. A., & Widaman, K. F. (2006). On the merits of orthogonalizing powered and product terms: Implications for modeling interactions among latent variables. Structural Equation Modeling, 13, 497-519.
24. Little, T. D., Cunningham, W. A., Shahar, G., & Widaman, K. F. (2002). To parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question, weighing the merits. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 151-173.
25. Marsh, H. W., Hau, K. T., Balla, J. R., & Grayson, D. (1998). Is more ever too much? The number of indicators per factor in confirmatory factor analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 33, 181-220.
26. Marsh, H. W., Wen, Z., & Hau, K. T. (2004). Structural equation models of latent interactions: Evaluation of alternative estimation strategies and indicator construction. Psychological Methods, 9, 275-300.
27. Marsh, H. W., Wen, Z., & Hau, K. (2006). Structural equation models of latent interaction and quadratic effects. In G. R. Hancock & R. O. Mueller (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: A second course (pp. 225-265). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
28. Marsh, H. W., Wen, Z., Hau, K. T., Little, T. D., Bovaird, J. A., & Widaman, K. F. (2007). Unconstrained structural equation models of latent interactions: Contrasting residual-and mean-centered approaches. Structural Equation Modeling, 14, 570-580.
29. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2010). Mplus (Version 6.0). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
30. R Development Core Team. (2010). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from http://www.R-project.org
31. Rigdon, E. E., Schumacker, R. E., & Wothke, W. (1998). A comparative review of interaction and nonlinear modeling. In R. E. Schumacker & G. A. Marcoulides (Eds.), Interaction and nonlinear effects in structural equation modeling (pp. 1-16). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
32. Saris, W. E., Batista-Foguet, J. M., & Coenders, G. (2007). Selection of indicators for the interaction term in structural equation models with interaction. Quality and Quantity, 41, 55-72.
33. Satorra, A., & Bentler, P. M. (1994). Corrections to test statistics and standard errors in covariance structure analysis. In A. von Eye & C. C. Clogg (Eds.), Latent variables analysis: Applications for developmental research (pp. 399-419). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
34. Schermelleh-Engel, K., Klein, A., & Moosbrugger, H. (1998). Estimating nonlinear effects using a latent moderated structural equations approach. In R. E. Schumacker & G. A. Marcoulides (Eds.), Interaction and nonlinear effects in structural equation modeling (pp. 203-238). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
35. Schumacker, R. E. (2002). Latent variable interaction modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 40-54.
36. Schumacker, R. E., & Marcoulides, G. A. (Eds.). (1998). Interaction and nonlinear effects in structural equation modeling. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
37. Stapleton, L. M., & Leite, W. L. (2005). A review of syllabi for a sample of structural equation modeling courses. Structural Equation Modeling, 12, 642-664.
38. Yang, C., Nay, S., & Hoyle, R. H. (2010). Three approaches to using lengthy ordinal scales in structural equation models: Parceling, latent scoring, and shortening scales. Applied Psychological Measurement, 34, 122-142.