A bifactor exploratory structural equation modeling framework for the identification of distinct sources of construct-relevant psychometric multidimensionality

Structural Equation Modeling

Volumn 23, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 116-139

  Morin, Alexandre J S ^a   Katrin Arens, A ^b   Marsh, Herbert W ^a  

^a AUSTRALIAN CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^b GERMAN INSTITUTE FOR INTERNATIONAL EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH   (Germany)

Author keywords

Bifactor; Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA); Exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM); Hierarchical; Multidimensionality; Psychometric; Self concept

Indexed keywords

STATISTICAL METHODS;

BIFACTOR; CONFIRMATORY FACTOR ANALYSES (CFA); HIERARCHICAL; MULTIDIMENSIONALITY; PSYCHOMETRIC; SELF-CONCEPT; STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING;

FACTOR ANALYSIS;

EID: 84930050659     PISSN: 10705511     EISSN: 15328007     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10705511.2014.961800     Document Type: Article

References (95)

1. Abu-Hilal, M. M., and Aal-Hussain, A. Q. A. (1997). Dimensionality and hierarchy of the SDQ in a non-Western milieu: A test of self-concept invariance across gender. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 28, 535-553.
2. Akaike, H. (1987). Factor analysis and AIC. Psychometrika, 52, 317-332.
3. Arens, A. K., Yeung, A. S., Craven, R. G., and Hasselhorn, M. (2011). The twofold multidimensionality of academic self-concept: Domain specificity and separation between competence and affect components. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103, 970-981.
4. Arens, A. K., Yeung, A. S., Craven, R. G., and Hasselhorn, M. (2013). A short German version of the Self-Description Questionnaire I: Theoretical and empirical comparability. International Journal of Research and Method in Education, 36, 415-438.
5. Asparouhov, T., and Muthén, B. O. (2009). Exploratory structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 16, 397-438.
6. Barendse, M. T., Oort, F. J., and Garst, G. J. (2010). Using restricted factor analysis with latent moderated structures to detect uniform and nonuniform measurement bias: A simulation study. AStA: Advances in Statistical Analysis, 94, 117-127.
7. Barendse, M. T., Oort, F. J., Werner, C. S., Ligtvoet, R., and Schermelleh-Engel, K. (2012). Measurement bias detection through factor analysis. Structural Equation Modeling, 19, 561-579.
8. Bentler, P. (1990). Comparative fit in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238-246.
9. Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York, NY: Wiley.
10. Bozdogan, H. (1987). Model selection and Akaike’s information criterion (AIC): The general theory and its analytical extensions. Psychometrika, 52, 345-370.
11. Browne, M. W. (2001). An overview of analytic rotation in exploratory factor analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 36, 111-150.
12. Browne, M. W., and Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. BollenandJ. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136-162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
13. Brunner, M., Keller, U., Dierendonck, C., Reichert, M., Ugen, S., Fischbach, A., and Martin, R. (2010). The structure of academic self-concepts revisited: The nested Marsh/Shavelson model. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 964-981.
14. Brunner, M., Keller, U., Hornung, C., Reichert, M., and Martin, R. (2009). The cross-cultural generalizability of a new structural model of academic self-concepts. Learning and Individual Differences, 19, 387-403.
15. Brunner, M., Lüdtke, O., and Trautwein, U. (2008). The internal/external frame of reference model revisited: Incorporating general cognitive ability and general academic self-concept. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 43, 137-172.
16. Brunner, M., Nagy, G., and Wilhelm, O. (2012). A tutorial on hierarchically structured constructs. Journal of Personality, 80, 796-846.
17. Byrne, B. M. (1996). Measuring self-concept across the life span: Issues and instrumentation. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
18. Byrne, B. M., Shavelson, R. J., and Muthén, B. O. (1989). Testing for the equivalence of factor structures: The issue of partial measurement invariance. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 456-466.
19. Caci, H., Morin, A. J. S., and Tran, A. (2015). Teacher ratings of the ADHD-RS IV in a community sample: Results from the ChiP-ARD study. Journal of Attention Disorders. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/1087054712473834
20. Chen, F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indices to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 14, 464-504.
21. Chen, F. F., West, S. G., and Sousa, K. H. (2006). A comparison of bifactor and second-order models of quality of life. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 41, 189-255.
22. Cheung, G. W., and Lau, R. S. (2008). Testing mediation and suppression effects of latent variables: Bootstrapping with structural equation models. Organizational Research Methods, 11, 296-325.
23. Cheung, G. W., and Lau, R. S. (2012). A direct comparison approach for testing measurement invariance. Organizational Research Methods, 15, 167-198.
24. Cheung, G. W., and Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-offit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 233-255.
25. Eid, M., Nussbeck, F. W., Geiser, C., Cole, D. A., Gollwitzer, M., and Lischetzke, M. (2008). Structural equation modelling of multitrait-multimethod data: Different models for different types of methods. Psychological Methods, 13, 230-253.
26. Enders, C. K. (2010). Applied missing data analysis. New York, NY: Guilford.
27. Fan, X., and Sivo, S. A. (2005). Sensitivity of fit indexes to misspecified model components: Rationale of two-index strategy revisited. Structural Equation Modeling, 12, 343-367.
28. Fan, X., and Sivo, S. A. (2007). Sensitivity of fit indices to model misspecification and model types. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 42, 509-529.
29. Fan, X., and Sivo, S. A. (2009). Using goodness-of-fit indexes in assessing mean structure invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 16, 54-69.
30. Gignac, G. E. (2007). Multi-factor modeling in individual differences research: Some recommendations and suggestions. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 37-48.
31. Gignac, G. E., Palmer, B., and Stough, C. (2007). A confirmatory factor analytic investigation of the TAS-20: Corroboration of a five-factor model and suggestions for improvement. Journal of Personality Assessment, 89, 247-257.
32. Gignac, G. E., and Watkins, M. W. (2013). Bifactor modeling and the estimation of model-based reliability in the WAIS-IV. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 48, 639-662.
33. Graham, J. W. (2009). Missing data analysis: Making it work in the real world. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 549-576.
34. Grimm, K. J., Steele, J. S., Ram, N., and Nesselroade, J. R. (2013). Exploratory latent growth models in the structural equation modeling framework. Structural Equation Modeling, 20, 568-591.
35. Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: Guilford.
36. Hershberger, S. L., and Marcoulides, G. A. (2013). The problem of equivalent structural models. In G. R. Hancock and R. O. Mueller (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: A second course (2nd ed., pp. 13-42). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
37. Holzinger, K. J., and Swineford, F. (1937). The bi-factor model. Psychometrika, 2, 1-17.
38. Hu, L.-T., and Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3, 424-453.
39. Jennrich, R. I., and Bentler, P. M. (2011). Exploratory bi-factor analysis. Psychometrika, 76, 537-549.
40. Jennrich, R. I., and Bentler, P. M. (2012). Exploratory bi-factor analysis: The oblique case. Psychometrika, 77, 442-454.
41. Jöreskog, K. G. (1973). A general method for estimating a linear structural equation system. In A. S. Golberger and O. D. Duncan (Eds.), Structural equation models in the social sciences (pp. 85-112). New York, NY: Seminar.
42. Jöreskog, K. G., and Goldberger, A. (1975). Estimation of a model with multiple indicators and multiple causes of a single latent variable. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 10, 631-639.
43. Jose, P. E. (2013). Doing statistical mediation and moderation. New York, NY: Guilford.
44. MacCallum, R. C., Wegener, D. T., Uchino, B. N., and Fabrigar, L. R. (1993). The problem of equivalent models in applications of covariance structure analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 185-199.
45. MacKinnon, D. P. (2008). Introduction to statistical mediation analysis. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
46. MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J., and Fritz, M. S. (2007). Mediation analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 593-614.
47. MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., and Williams, J. (2004). Confidence limits for the indirect effect: Distribution of product and resampling methods. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39, 99-128.
48. Marsh, H. W. (1987). The hierarchical structure of self-concept and the application of hierarchical confirmatory factor analyses. Journal of Educational Measurement, 24, 17-39.
49. Marsh, H. W. (1989). Age and sex effects in multiple dimensions of self-concept: Preadolescence to early adulthood. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 417-430.
50. Marsh, H. W. (1990). Self-Description Questionnaire-I (SDQ-I) manual. Macarthur, NSW, Australia: University of Western Sydney.
51. Marsh, H. W. (2007). Self-concept theory, measurement and research into practice: The role of self-concept in educational psychology. Leicester, UK: British Psychological Society.
52. Marsh, H. W., Abduljabbar, A. S., Abu-Hilal, M., Morin, A. J. S., Abdelfattah, F., Leung, K. C., Xu, M. K., Nagengast, B., and Parker, P. (2013). Factor structure, discriminant and convergent validity of TIMSS math and science motivation measures: A comparison of USA and Saudi Arabia. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105, 108-128.
53. Marsh, H. W., and Ayotte, V. (2003). Do multiple dimensions of self-concept become more differentiated with age? The differential distinctiveness hypothesis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 687-706.
54. Marsh, H. W., Hau, K.-T., and Grayson, D. (2005). Goodness of fit evaluation in structural equation modeling. In A. Maydeu-Olivares and J. McArdle (Eds.), Contemporary psychometrics. A Festschrift for Roderick P. McDonald (pp. 275-340). Mahwah NJ: Erlbaum.
55. Marsh, H. W., Hau, K.-T., and Wen, Z. (2004). In search of golden rules: Comment on hypothesis-testing approaches to cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler (1999). Structural Equation Modeling, 11, 320-341.
56. Marsh, H. W., and Hocevar, D. (1985). Application of confirmatory factor analysis to the study of self-concept: First-and higher order factor models and their invariance across grades. Psychological Bulletin, 97, 562-582.
57. Marsh, H. W., Liem, G. A. D., Martin, A. J., Morin, A. J. S., and Nagengast, B. (2011). Methodological measurement fruitfulness of exploratory structural equation model: New approaches to issues in motivation and engagement. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 29, 322-346.
58. Marsh, H. W., Lüdtke, O., Muthén, B., Asparouhov, T., Morin, A. J. S., Trautwein, U., and Nagengast, B. (2010). A new look at the bigfive factor structure through exploratory structural equation modeling. Psychological Assessment, 22, 471-491.
59. Marsh, H. W., Lüdtke, O., Nagengast, B., Morin, A. J. S., and Von Davier, M. (2013). Why item parcels are (almost) never appropriate: Two wrongs do not make a right—Camouflaging misspecification with item parcels in CFA models. Psychological Methods, 18, 257-284.
60. Marsh, H.W., Morin, A. J. S., Parker, P. D., and Kaur, G. (2014). Exploratory structural equation modelling: An integration of the best features of exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 10, 85-110.
61. Marsh, H. W., Muthén, B., Asparouhov, A., Lüdtke, O., Robitzsch, A., Morin, A. J. S., and Trautwein, U. (2009). Exploratory structural equation modeling, integrating CFA and EFA: Application to students’ evaluations of university teaching. Structural Equation Modeling, 16, 439-476.
62. Marsh, H. W., Nagengast, B., and Morin, A. J. S. (2013). Measurement invariance of big-five factors over the life span: ESEM tests of gender, age, plasticity, maturity, and La Dolce Vita effects. Developmental Psychology, 49, 1194-1218.
63. Marsh, H. W., Nagengast, B., Morin, A. J. S., Parada, R. H., Craven, R. G., and Hamilton, L. R. (2011). Construct validity of the multidimensional structure of bullying and victimization: An application of exploratory structural equation modeling. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103, 701-732.
64. Marsh, H. W., Scalas, L. F., and Nagengast, B. (2010). Longitudinal tests of competing G-factor structures for the Rosenberg self-esteem scale: Traits, ephemeral artifacts, and stable response styles. Psychological Assessment, 22, 366-381.
65. Marsh, H. W., Tracey, D. K., and Craven, R. G. (2006). Multidimensional self-concept structure for preadolescents with mild intellectual disabilities: A hybrid multigroup-mimic approach. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66, 795-818.
66. McCrae, R. R., Zonderman, A. B., Costa, P. T., Jr., Bond, M. H., and Paunonen, S. (1996). Evaluating the replicability of factors in the revised NEO Personality Inventory: Confirmatory factor analysis versus Procrustes rotation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 552-566.
67. Meleddu, M., Guicciardi, M., Scalas, L. F., and Fadda, D. (2012). Validation of an Italian version of the Oxford Happiness Inventory in adolescence. Journal of Personality Assessment, 94, 175-185.
68. Meredith, W. (1993). Measurement invariance, factor analysis and factorial invariance. Psychometrika, 58, 525-543.
69. Millsap, R. E. (2011). Statistical approaches to measurement invariance. New York, NY: Routledge.
70. Möller, J., Pohlmann, B., Köller, O., and Marsh, H. W. (2009). Meta-analytic path analysis of the internal/external frame of reference model of academic achievement and academic self-concept. Review of Educational Research, 79, 1129-1167.
71. Morin, A. J. S., and Maïano, C. (2011). Cross-validation of the short form of the Physical Self-Inventory (PSI-S) using exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM). Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 12, 540-554.
72. Morin, A. J. S., Marsh, H. W., and Nagengast, B. (2015). Exploratory structural equation modeling. In G. R. Hancock and R. O. Mueller (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: A second course (2nd ed., pp. 395-436). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
73. Morin, A. J. S., Tran, A., and Caci, H. (2013). Factorial validity of the ADHD Adult Symptom Rating Scale in a French community sample. Journal of Attention Disorders. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/1087054713488825
74. Murray, A. L., and Johnson, W. (2013). The limitations of model fit in comparing the bi-factor versus higher-order models of human cognitive ability structure. Intelligence, 41, 407-422.
75. Muthén, B. O. (1989). Latent variables in heterogenous populations. Psychometrika, 54, 557-585.
76. Muthén, L. K., and Muthén, B. O. (1998-2013). Mplus user’s guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén and Muthén.
77. Reise, S. P. (2012). The rediscovery of bifactor measurement models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 47, 667-696.
78. Reise, S. P., Moore, T. M., and Haviland, M. G. (2010). Bifactor models and rotations: Exploring the extent to which multidimensional data yield univocal scale scores. Journal of Personality Assessment, 92, 544-559.
79. Reise, S. P., Moore, T. M., and Maydeu-Olivares, A. (2011). Targeted bifactor rotations and assessing the impact of model violations on the parameters of unidimensional and bifactor models. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 71, 684-711.
80. Reise, S. P., Morizot, J., and Hays, R. D. (2007). The role of the bifactor model in resolving dimensionality issues in health outcomes measures. Quality of Life Research, 16, 19-31.
81. Rindskopf, D., and Rose, T. (1988). Some theory and applications of confirmatory second-order factor analyses. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 23, 51-67.
82. Schmid, J., and Leiman, J. M. (1957). The development of hierarchical factor solutions. Psychometrika, 22, 53-61.
83. Schmitt, T. A., and Sass, D. A. (2011). Rotation criteria and hypothesis testing for exploratory factor analysis: Implications for factor pattern loadings and interfactor correlations. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 71, 95-113.
84. Schwartz, G. (1978). Estimating the dimension of a model. The Annals of Statistics, 6, 461-464.
85. Schweizer, K. (2012). On correlated errors. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 28, 1-2.
86. Sclove, L. (1987). Application of model-selection criteria to some problems in multivariate analysis. Psychometrika, 52, 333-343.
87. Shavelson, R. J., Hubner, J. J., and Stanton, G. C. (1976). Self-concept: Validation of construct interpretations. Journal of Educational Research, 46, 407-441.
88. Simms, L. J., Grös, D. F., Watson, D., and O’Hara, M. (2008). Parsing general and specific components of depression and anxiety with bifactor modeling. Depression and Anxiety, 25, 34-46.
89. Steiger, J. H. (1990). Structural model evaluation and modification: An interval estimation approach. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 173-180.
90. Tucker, L. R., and Lewis, C. (1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 38, 1-10.
91. Vispoel, W. P. (1995). Self-concept in artistic domains: An extension of the Shavelson, Hubner, and Stanton (1976) model. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 134-153.
92. Watkins, D., and Akande, A. (1992). Internal structure of the Self-Description Questionnaire: A Nigerian investigation. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 62, 120-125.
93. Watkins, D., and Dong, Q. (1994). Assessing the self-esteem of Chinese school children. Educational Psychology, 14, 129-137.
94. Watkins, D., Juhasz, A. M., Walker, A., and Janvlaitiene, N. (1995). The Self-Description Questionnaire-1:Lithuanian. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 11, 41-51.
95. Yung, Y. F., Thissen, D., and McLeod, L. D. (1999). On the relationship between the higher-order factor model and the hierarchical factor model. Psychometrika, 64, 113-128.