NotesFAQContact Us
Collection
Advanced
Search Tips
Showing all 4 results Save | Export
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Russell P. Houpt; Kevin J. Grimm; Aaron T. McLaughlin; Daryl R. Van Tongeren – Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 2024
Numerous methods exist to determine the optimal number of classes when using latent profile analysis (LPA), but none are consistently correct. Recently, the likelihood incremental percentage per parameter (LI3P) was proposed as a model effect-size measure. To evaluate the LI3P more thoroughly, we simulated 50,000 datasets, manipulating factors…
Descriptors: Structural Equation Models, Profiles, Sample Size, Evaluation Methods
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Meng Qiu; Ke-Hai Yuan – Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 2024
Latent class analysis (LCA) is a widely used technique for detecting unobserved population heterogeneity in cross-sectional data. Despite its popularity, the performance of LCA is not well understood. In this study, we evaluate the performance of LCA with binary data by examining classification accuracy, parameter estimation accuracy, and coverage…
Descriptors: Classification, Sample Size, Monte Carlo Methods, Social Science Research
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Chunhua Cao; Benjamin Lugu; Jujia Li – Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 2024
This study examined the false positive (FP) rates and sensitivity of Bayesian fit indices to structural misspecification in Bayesian structural equation modeling. The impact of measurement quality, sample size, model size, the magnitude of misspecified path effect, and the choice or prior on the performance of the fit indices was also…
Descriptors: Structural Equation Models, Bayesian Statistics, Measurement, Error of Measurement
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Beauducel, Andre; Herzberg, Philipp Yorck – Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 2006
This simulation study compared maximum likelihood (ML) estimation with weighted least squares means and variance adjusted (WLSMV) estimation. The study was based on confirmatory factor analyses with 1, 2, 4, and 8 factors, based on 250, 500, 750, and 1,000 cases, and on 5, 10, 20, and 40 variables with 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 categories. There was no…
Descriptors: Factor Analysis, Maximum Likelihood Statistics, Classification, Sample Size