Measuring Method Effects: From Traditional to Design-Oriented Approaches

Current Directions in Psychological Science

Volumn 25, Issue 4, 2016, Pages 275-280

  Eid, Michael ^a   Geiser, Christian ^b   Koch, Tobias ^c  

^a FREIE UNIVERSITÄT BERLIN   (Germany)

^b UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c LEUPHANA UNIVERSITY OF LÜNEBURG   (Germany)

Author keywords

bi factor model; convergent validity; CTC(M 1) model; multimethod research; multitrait multimethod analysis

Indexed keywords

EID: 84981350731     PISSN: 09637214     EISSN: 14678721     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0963721416649624     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. M.EidC.GeiserT.KochM.Heene (in press). (See References). Discusses several problems of g-factor models, explains the measurement-theoretical foundation of g-factor models, and presents alternative modeling approaches.
2. M.EidF.W.NussbeckC.GeiserD.A.ColeM.GollwitzerT.Lischetzke (2008). (See References). Gives an overview of single- and multilevel multitrait-multimethod models for different types of research designs, with several empirical applications.
3. C.GeiserM.EidS.G.WestT.LischetzkeF.W.Nussbeck (2012). (See References). Discusses the meaning of method effects in different multitrait-multimethod models for structurally different methods.
4. T.KochM.EidK.Lochner (in press). (See References). Explains in detail how the latent variables of different multitrait-multimethod models can be defined in the context of stochastic measurement theory.
5. F.W.NussbeckM.EidC.GeiserD.S.CourvoisierT.Lischetzke (2009). (See References). Shows how multilevel multitrait-multimethod models can also be specified as classical single-level models of confirmatory factor analysis.
6. D.T.CampbellD.W.Fiske (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81–105.
7. H.Carretero-DiosM.EidW.Ruch (2011). Analyzing multitrait-mulitmethod data with multilevel confirmatory factor analysis: An application to the validation of the State-Trait Cheerfulness Inventory. Journal of Research in Personality, 45, 153–164.
8. L.Castro-SchiloK.F.WidamanK.J.Grimm (2013). Neglect the structure of multitrait-multimethod data at your peril: Implications for associations with external variables. Structural Equation Modeling, 20, 181–207.
9. D.S.CourvoisierF.W.NussbeckM.EidC.GeiserD.A.Cole (2008). Analyzing the convergent validity of states and traits: Development and application of multimethod latent state-trait models. Psychological Assessment, 20, 270–280.
10. C.CrayenC.GeiserH.ScheithauerM.Eid (2011). Evaluating interventions with multimethod data: A structural equation modeling approach. Structural Equation Modeling, 18, 497–524.
11. L.J.Cronbach (1995). Giving method variance its due. In (Eds.), Personality research, methods, and theory: A festschrift honoring Donald W. Fiske (pp. 145–160). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
12. L.Dumenci (2000). Multitrait-multimethod analysis. In (Eds.), Handbook of applied multivariate statistics and mathematical modeling (pp. 583–611). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
13. M.Eid (2000). A multitrait-multimethod model with minimal assumptions. Psychometrika, 65, 241–261.
14. M.EidC.GeiserT.KochM.Heene (in press). Anomalous results in g-factor models: Explanations and alternatives. Psychological Methods.
15. M.EidT.Koch (2014). The meaning of higher-order factors in reflective measurement models. Measurement, 12, 96–101.
16. M.EidT.LischetzkeF.NussbeckL.Trierweiler (2003). Separating trait effects from trait-specific method effects in multitrait-multimethod analysis: A multiple indicator CTC(M-1) model. Psychological Methods, 8, 38–60.
17. M.EidF.W.NussbeckC.GeiserD.A.ColeM.GollwitzerT.Lischetzke (2008). Structural equation modeling of multitrait-multimethod data: Different models for different types of methods. Psychological Methods, 13, 230–253.
18. C.GeiserJ.BishopG.Lockhart (2015). Collapsing factors in multitrait-multimethod models: Examining consequences of a mismatch between measurement design and model. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, Article 946. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00946
19. C.GeiserM.EidF.W.Nussbeck (2008). On the meaning of the latent variables in the CT-C(M–1) model: A comment on Maydeu-Olivares & Coffman (2006). Psychological Methods, 13, 49–57.
20. C.GeiserM.EidF.W.NussbeckD.CourvoisierD.Cole (2010a). Analyzing true change in longitudinal multitrait-multimethod studies: Application of a multimethod change model to depression and anxiety in children. Developmental Psychology, 46, 29–45.
21. C.GeiserM.EidF.W.NussbeckD.CourvoisierD.Cole (2010b). Multitrait-multimethod change modeling. Advances in Statistical Analysis, 94, 185–201.
22. C.GeiserM.EidS.G.WestT.LischetzkeF.W.Nussbeck (2012). A comparison of method effects in two confirmatory factor models for structurally different methods. Structural Equation Modeling, 19, 409–436.
23. J.W.Graham (2012). Missing data: Analysis and design. New York, NY: Springer.
24. K.G.Jöreskog (1971). Statistical analysis of sets of congeneric tests. Psychometrika, 36, 109–133.
25. D.A.Kenny (1976). An empirical application of confirmatory factor analysis to the multitrait–multimethod matrix. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 12, 247–252.
26. D.A.Kenny (1995). The multitrait-multimethod matrix: Design, analysis, and conceptual issues. In (Eds.), Personality research, methods, and theory: A festschrift honoring Donald W. Fiske (pp. 111–124). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
27. T.KochM.EidK.Lochner (in press). Multitrait-multimethod-analysis: The psychometric foundation of CFA-MTMM models. In (Eds.), The Wiley handbook of psychometric testing. London, England: John Wiley & Sons.
28. T.KochM.SchultzeJ.BurrusR.D.RobertsM.Eid (2015). A multilevel CFA-MTMM model for nested structurally different methods. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 40, 477–510.
29. T.KochM.SchultzeM.EidC.Geiser (2014). A longitudinal multilevel CFA-MTMM model for interchangeable and structurally different methods. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, Article 311. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00311
30. T.KochM.SchultzeM.JeonF.NussbeckA.-K.PraetoriusM.Eid (2016). A multilevel CFA-MTMM model for structurally different and non-independent interchangeable methods. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 511, 67–85.
31. J.MahlkeM.SchultzeT.KochM.EidR.EckertF.Brodbeck (2016). A multilevel CFA-MTMM approach for multisource feedback instruments: Presentation and application of a new statistical model. Structural Equation Modeling, 23, 91–110.
32. H.W.Marsh (1989). Confirmatory factor analysis of multitrait-multimethod data: Many problems and a few solutions. Applied Psychological Measurement, 13, 335–361.
33. F.W.NussbeckM.EidC.GeiserD.S.CourvoisierT.Lischetzke (2009). A CTC(M–1) model for different types of raters. Methodology, 5, 88–98.
34. S.PohlR.Steyer (2010). Modeling common traits and method effects in multitrait-multimethod analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 45, 45–72.
35. S.PohlR.SteyerK.Kraus (2008). Modelling method effects as individual causal effects. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society), 171, 41–63.
36. K.-F.Widaman (1985). Hierarchically nested covariance structure models for multitrait-multimethod data. Applied Psychological Measurement, 9, 1–26.
37. W.Wothke (1995). Covariance components analysis of the multitrait-multimethod matrix. In (Eds.), Personality research, methods, and theory: A festschrift honoring Donald W. Fiske (pp. 125–144). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.