Should researchers use single indicators, best indicators, or multiple indicators in structural equation models?

BMC Medical Research Methodology

Volumn 12, Issue , 2012, Pages

  Hayduk, Leslie A ^a   Littvay, Levente ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

^b CENTRAL EUROPEAN UNIVERSITY   (Hungary)

Author keywords

Factor analysis; Multiple indicators; Single indicators; Structural equation model; Testing

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; EPIDEMIOLOGY; FACTORIAL ANALYSIS; HEALTH STATUS INDICATOR; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; NONLINEAR SYSTEM; PERSONNEL; QUESTIONNAIRE; STATISTICAL MODEL; THEORETICAL MODEL;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); CAUSALITY; FACTOR ANALYSIS, STATISTICAL; HEALTH STATUS INDICATORS; HUMANS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; MODELS, THEORETICAL; NONLINEAR DYNAMICS; QUESTIONNAIRES; RESEARCH DESIGN; RESEARCH PERSONNEL;

EID: 84867650066     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14712288     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-12-159     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Thurstone LL, Multiple Factor Analysis Chicago: University of Chicago Press 1947
2. Harman HH, Modern Factor Analysis Chicago: University of Chicago Press 2 1967
3. Lawley DN, Maxwell AE, Factor Analysis as a Statistical Method London: Butterworth & Co 2 1971
4. Mulaik SA, The Foundations of Factor Analysis New York: McGraw-Hill 1972
5. Correlation and causation. Wright S, J Agric Res 1921 20 557 585
6. The method of path coefficients. Wright S, Ann Math Stat 1934 5 161 215 10.1214/aoms/1177732676
7. Blalock HM Jr, Causal Inferences in Nonexperimental Research Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press 1964
8. Duncan OD, Introduction to Structural Equation Models New York: Academic Press 1975
9. Heise DR, Causal Analysis New York: John Wiley and Sons 1975
10. Byrne BM, A Primer of LISREL: Basic Applications and Programming for Confirmatory Factor Analytic Models New York: Springer-Verlag 1989
11. Kline RB, Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling New York: Guilford Press 2005
12. Byrne BM, Structural Equation Modeling with LISREL, PRELIS, and SIMPLIS Lawrence Erlbaum Associate: Mahwah NJ 1998
13. Byrne BM, Structural Equation Modeling with EQS: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah NJ 2 2006
14. Bollen KA, Structural Equations with Latent Variables New York: Wiley 1989
15. Hayduk LA, Structural Equation Modeling with LISREL: Essentials and Advances Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press 1987
16. Hayduk LA, LISREL Issues, Debates and Strategies Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press 1996
17. Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and recommended two-step approach. Anderson JC, Gerbing DW, Psychol Bull 1988 103 411 423
18. Assumptions and comparative strengths of the two-step approach: comment on Fornell and Yi. Anderson JC, Gerbing DW, Sociol Method Res 1992 20 321 33 10.1177/0049124192020003002
19. Assumptions of the two-step approach to latent variable modeling. Fornell C, Yi Y, Sociol Method Res 1992 20 291 320 10.1177/0049124192020003001
20. Assumptions of the two-step approach to latent modeling. Fornell C, Yi Y, Sociol Method Res 1992 20 334 339 10.1177/0049124192020003003
21. SEMNET, The Structural Equation Modeling Discussion Network http://www.aime.ua.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=SEMNET
22. Jiving the four-step, waltzing around factor analysis, and other serious fun. Hayduk LA, Glaser DN, Struct Equ Model 2000 7 1 35 10.1207/ S15328007SEM0701-01
23. Doing the four-step right. Mulaik SA, Millsap RE, Struct Equ Model 2000 7 36 73 10.1207/S15328007SEM0701-02
24. Modeling strategies: in search of the holy grail. Bollen KA, Struct Equ Model 2000 7 74 81 10.1207/S15328007SEM0701-03
25. Rites, wrongs, and gold in model testing. Bentler PM, Struct Equ Model 2000 7 82 91 10.1207/S15328007SEM0701-04
26. Another perspective on the proper number of factors and the appropriate number of steps. Herting JR, Costner HL, Struct Equ Model 2000 7 92 110 10.1207/S15328007SEM0701-05
27. Doing the four-step, right-2-3, wrong-2-3: A brief reply to Mulaik and Millsap; Bollen; Bentler; and Herting and Costner. Hayduk LA, Glaser DN, Struct Equ Model 2000 7 111 123 10.1207/S15328007SEM0701-06
28. Structural equation modelling: Adjudging model fit. Barrett P, Personal Individ Differ 2007 42 815 824 10.1016/j.paid.2006.09.018
29. Testing! Testing! One, two, three - Testing the theory in structural equation models! Hayduk LA, Cummings GG, Boadu K, Pazderka-Robinson H, Boulianne S, Personal Individ Differ 2007 42 841 850 10.1016/j.paid.2006.10.001
30. Rethinking fit assessment in structural equation modelling: A commentary and elaboration on Barrett (2007). McIntosh CN, Personal Individ Differ 2007 42 859 867 10.1016/j.paid.2006.09.020
31. Structural equation modeling made difficult. Millsap RE, Personal Individ Differ 2007 42 875 881 10.1016/j.paid.2006.09.021
32. There is a place for approximate fit in structural equation modelling. Mulaik SA, Personal Individ Differ 2007 42 883 891 10.1016/j.paid.2006.10.024
33. Understanding the limitations of global fit assessment in structural equation modeling. Steiger JH, Personal Individ Differ 2007 42 893 898 10.1016/j.paid.2006.09.017
34. Fighting to understand the world causally: Three battles connected to the causal implications of structural equation models. Hayduk LA, Pazderka-Robinson H, Pp 147-171 in Outhwaite W, Turner S (eds.), Sage Handbook of Social Science Methodology London: Sage Publications 2007
35. Jöreskog K, Sörbom D, LISREL 8: Users Reference Guide Chicago: Scientific Software International 1996
36. Entwisle DR, Hayduk LA, Reilly TW, Early Schooling: Cognitive and Affective Outcomes Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press 1982
37. Personal space: understanding the simplex model. Hayduk LA, J Nonverbal Behav 1994 18 245 260 10.1007/BF02170028
38. Personal space: the conceptual and measurement implications of structural equation models. Hayduk LA, Can J Behav Sci 1985 17 140 149
39. Sexual orientation and the willingness of Catholic seminary students to conform to church teachings. Hayduk LA, Stratkotter RF, Rovers MW, J Sci Stud Relig 1997 36 455 467 10.2307/1387861
40. The weird world, and equally weird measurement models: Reactive indicators and the validity revolution. Hayduk LA, Pazderka-Robinson H, Cummings GG, Boadu K, Verbeek EL, Perks TA, Struct Equ Model 2007 14 280 310 10.1080/10705510709336747
41. The concept of validity. Borsboom D, Mellenbergh GJ, van Heerden J, Psychol Rev 2004 111 1061 1071 15482073 (Pubitemid 39375087)