Cargando…

Model fit evaluation in multilevel structural equation models

Assessing goodness of model fit is one of the key questions in structural equation modeling (SEM). Goodness of fit is the extent to which the hypothesized model reproduces the multivariate structure underlying the set of variables. During the earlier development of multilevel structural equation mod...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Ryu, Ehri
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3913991/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24550882
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00081
_version_ 1782302322995494912
author Ryu, Ehri
author_facet Ryu, Ehri
author_sort Ryu, Ehri
collection PubMed
description Assessing goodness of model fit is one of the key questions in structural equation modeling (SEM). Goodness of fit is the extent to which the hypothesized model reproduces the multivariate structure underlying the set of variables. During the earlier development of multilevel structural equation models, the “standard” approach was to evaluate the goodness of fit for the entire model across all levels simultaneously. The model fit statistics produced by the standard approach have a potential problem in detecting lack of fit in the higher-level model for which the effective sample size is much smaller. Also when the standard approach results in poor model fit, it is not clear at which level the model does not fit well. This article reviews two alternative approaches that have been proposed to overcome the limitations of the standard approach. One is a two-step procedure which first produces estimates of saturated covariance matrices at each level and then performs single-level analysis at each level with the estimated covariance matrices as input (Yuan and Bentler, 2007). The other level-specific approach utilizes partially saturated models to obtain test statistics and fit indices for each level separately (Ryu and West, 2009). Simulation studies (e.g., Yuan and Bentler, 2007; Ryu and West, 2009) have consistently shown that both alternative approaches performed well in detecting lack of fit at any level, whereas the standard approach failed to detect lack of fit at the higher level. It is recommended that the alternative approaches are used to assess the model fit in multilevel structural equation model. Advantages and disadvantages of the two alternative approaches are discussed. The alternative approaches are demonstrated in an empirical example.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3913991
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-39139912014-02-18 Model fit evaluation in multilevel structural equation models Ryu, Ehri Front Psychol Psychology Assessing goodness of model fit is one of the key questions in structural equation modeling (SEM). Goodness of fit is the extent to which the hypothesized model reproduces the multivariate structure underlying the set of variables. During the earlier development of multilevel structural equation models, the “standard” approach was to evaluate the goodness of fit for the entire model across all levels simultaneously. The model fit statistics produced by the standard approach have a potential problem in detecting lack of fit in the higher-level model for which the effective sample size is much smaller. Also when the standard approach results in poor model fit, it is not clear at which level the model does not fit well. This article reviews two alternative approaches that have been proposed to overcome the limitations of the standard approach. One is a two-step procedure which first produces estimates of saturated covariance matrices at each level and then performs single-level analysis at each level with the estimated covariance matrices as input (Yuan and Bentler, 2007). The other level-specific approach utilizes partially saturated models to obtain test statistics and fit indices for each level separately (Ryu and West, 2009). Simulation studies (e.g., Yuan and Bentler, 2007; Ryu and West, 2009) have consistently shown that both alternative approaches performed well in detecting lack of fit at any level, whereas the standard approach failed to detect lack of fit at the higher level. It is recommended that the alternative approaches are used to assess the model fit in multilevel structural equation model. Advantages and disadvantages of the two alternative approaches are discussed. The alternative approaches are demonstrated in an empirical example. Frontiers Media S.A. 2014-02-05 /pmc/articles/PMC3913991/ /pubmed/24550882 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00081 Text en Copyright © 2014 Ryu. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Psychology
Ryu, Ehri
Model fit evaluation in multilevel structural equation models
title Model fit evaluation in multilevel structural equation models
title_full Model fit evaluation in multilevel structural equation models
title_fullStr Model fit evaluation in multilevel structural equation models
title_full_unstemmed Model fit evaluation in multilevel structural equation models
title_short Model fit evaluation in multilevel structural equation models
title_sort model fit evaluation in multilevel structural equation models
topic Psychology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3913991/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24550882
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00081
work_keys_str_mv AT ryuehri modelfitevaluationinmultilevelstructuralequationmodels