When Are Multidimensional Data Unidimensional Enough for Structural Equation Modeling? An Evaluation of the DETECT Multidimensionality Index

Structural Equation Modeling

Volumn 22, Issue 4, 2015, Pages 504-516

  Bonifay, Wes E ^a   Reise, Steven P ^a   Scheines, Richard ^b   Meijer, Rob R ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF GRONINGEN   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

bifactor model; dimensionality assessment; structural equation modeling

Indexed keywords

STATISTICAL MECHANICS;

DIMENSIONALITY ASSESSMENT; MEASUREMENT MODEL; MODEL SPECIFICATIONS; MULTIDIMENSIONAL DATA; MULTIDIMENSIONALITY; PARAMETER ESTIMATE; STATISTICAL TOOLS; STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING;

PARAMETER ESTIMATION;

EID: 84942194146     PISSN: 10705511     EISSN: 15328007     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10705511.2014.938596     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. T.A.Ackerman, (1989). Unidimensional IRT calibration of compensatory and noncompensatory multidimensional items. Applied Psychological Measurement, 13, 113–127.
2. D.L.Bandalos, (2002). The effects of item parceling on goodness-of-fit and parameter estimate bias in structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 78–102.
3. P.M.Bentler, (2006). EQS structural equations program manual. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software.
4. F.Drasgow,, & C.K.Parsons, (1983). Application of unidimensional item response theory models to multidimensional data. Applied Psychological Measurement, 7, 189–199.
5. S.E.Embretson,, & S.P.Reise, (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
6. H.Finch,, & B.Habing, (2005). Comparison of NOHARM and DETECT in item cluster recovery: Counting dimensions and allocating items. Journal of Educational Measurement, 42, 149–169.
7. V.G.Folk,, & B.F.Green, (1989). Adaptive estimation when the unidimensionality assumption of IRT is violated. Applied Psychological Measurement, 13, 373–389.
8. M.J.Gierl,, J.P.Leighton,, & X.Tan, (2006). Evaluating DETECT classification accuracy and consistency when data display a complex structure. Journal of Educational Measurement, 43, 265–289.
9. J.Hattie,, K.Krakowski,, H.J.Rogers,, & H.Swaminathan, (1996). An assessment of Stout’s index of essential unidimensionality. Applied Psychological Measurement, 20(1), 1–14.
10. K.J.Holzinger,, & F.Swineford, (1937). The bi-factor method. Psychometrika, 2, 41–54.
11. L.Hu,, & P.M.Bentler, (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.
12. Kim, H. (1994). New techniques for the dimensionality assessment of standardized test data (Doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign). Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/2142/19110
13. L.Kirisci,, T.Hsu,, & L.Yu, (2001). Robustness of item parameter estimation programs to assumptions of unidimensionality and normality. Applied Psychological Measurement, 25, 146–162.
14. R.P.McDonald, (1981). The dimensionality of tests and items. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 34, 100–117.
15. R.P.McDonald, (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment. London, UK: Psychology Press.
16. A.W.Meade,, & C.M.Kroustalis, (2006). Problems with item parceling for confirmatory factor analytic tests of measurement invariance. Organizational Research Methods, 9, 369–403.
17. A.A.Mroch,, & D.M.Bolt, (2006). A simulation comparison of parametric and nonparametric dimensionality detection procedures. Applied Measurement in Education, 19, 67–91.
18. R.Nandakumar, (1991). Traditional dimensionality vs. essential dimensionality. Journal of Educational Measurement, 28, 99–117.
19. R.Development Core Team. (2011). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
20. S.P.Reise, (2012). The rediscovery of bifactor measurement models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 47, 667–696.
21. S.P.Reise,, T.M.Moore,, & M.G.Haviland, (2010). Bifactor models and rotations: Exploring the extent to which multidimensional data yield univocal scale scores. Journal of Personality Assessment, 92, 544–559.
22. S.P.Reise,, R.Scheines,, K.F.Widaman,, & M.G.Haviland, (2013). Multidimensionality and structural coefficient bias in structural equation modeling: A bifactor perspective. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 73, 5–26.
23. L.A.Roussos,, & O.Y.Ozbek, (2006). Formulation of the DETECT population parameter and evaluation of DETECT estimator bias. Journal of Educational Measurement, 43, 215–243.
24. S.K.Sterba,, & R.C.MacCallum, (2010). Variability in parameter estimates and model fit across repeated allocations of items to parcels. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 45, 322–358.
25. W.F.Stout, (1990). A new item response theory modeling approach with applications to unidimensionality assessment and ability estimation. Psychometrika, 55, 293–325.
26. W.Stout,, B.Habing,, J.Douglas,, H.R.Kim,, L.Roussos,, & J.Zhang, (1996). Conditional covariance-based nonparametric multidimensionality assessment. Applied Psychological Measurement, 20, 331–354.
27. Y.Takane,, & J.de Leeuw, (1987). On the relationship between item response theory and factor analysis of discretized variables. Psychometrika, 52, 393–408.
28. J.M.F.Ten Berge,, & G.Sočan, (2004). The greatest lower bound to the reliability of a test and the hypothesis of unidimensionality. Psychometrika, 69, 613–625.
29. S.G.West,, A.B.Taylor,, & W.Wu, (2012). Model fit and model selection in structural equation modeling. In R.H.Hoyle (Ed.), Handbook of structural equation modeling (pp. 209–231). New York, NY: Guilford.
30. J.Zhang, (2007). Conditional covariance theory and DETECT for polytomous items. Psychometrika, 72, 69–91.
31. J.Zhang,, & W.Stout, (1999). The theoretical DETECT index of dimensionality and its application to approximate simple structure. Psychometrika, 64, 213–249.