Cargando…

CFA with binary variables in small samples: a comparison of two methods

Asymptotically optimal correlation structure methods with binary data can break down in small samples. A new correlation structure methodology based on a recently developed odds-ratio (OR) approximation to the tetrachoric correlation coefficient is proposed as an alternative to the LPB approach prop...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Savalei, Victoria, Bonett, Douglas G., Bentler, Peter M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4285741/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25709585
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01515
_version_ 1782351590731022336
author Savalei, Victoria
Bonett, Douglas G.
Bentler, Peter M.
author_facet Savalei, Victoria
Bonett, Douglas G.
Bentler, Peter M.
author_sort Savalei, Victoria
collection PubMed
description Asymptotically optimal correlation structure methods with binary data can break down in small samples. A new correlation structure methodology based on a recently developed odds-ratio (OR) approximation to the tetrachoric correlation coefficient is proposed as an alternative to the LPB approach proposed by Lee et al. (1995). Unweighted least squares (ULS) estimation with robust standard errors and generalized least squares (GLS) estimation methods were compared. Confidence intervals and tests for individual model parameters exhibited the best performance using the OR approach with ULS estimation. The goodness-of-fit chi-square test exhibited the best Type I error control using the LPB approach with ULS estimation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4285741
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-42857412015-02-23 CFA with binary variables in small samples: a comparison of two methods Savalei, Victoria Bonett, Douglas G. Bentler, Peter M. Front Psychol Psychology Asymptotically optimal correlation structure methods with binary data can break down in small samples. A new correlation structure methodology based on a recently developed odds-ratio (OR) approximation to the tetrachoric correlation coefficient is proposed as an alternative to the LPB approach proposed by Lee et al. (1995). Unweighted least squares (ULS) estimation with robust standard errors and generalized least squares (GLS) estimation methods were compared. Confidence intervals and tests for individual model parameters exhibited the best performance using the OR approach with ULS estimation. The goodness-of-fit chi-square test exhibited the best Type I error control using the LPB approach with ULS estimation. Frontiers Media S.A. 2015-01-07 /pmc/articles/PMC4285741/ /pubmed/25709585 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01515 Text en Copyright © 2015 Savalei, Bonett and Bentler. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ 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
Savalei, Victoria
Bonett, Douglas G.
Bentler, Peter M.
CFA with binary variables in small samples: a comparison of two methods
title CFA with binary variables in small samples: a comparison of two methods
title_full CFA with binary variables in small samples: a comparison of two methods
title_fullStr CFA with binary variables in small samples: a comparison of two methods
title_full_unstemmed CFA with binary variables in small samples: a comparison of two methods
title_short CFA with binary variables in small samples: a comparison of two methods
title_sort cfa with binary variables in small samples: a comparison of two methods
topic Psychology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4285741/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25709585
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01515
work_keys_str_mv AT savaleivictoria cfawithbinaryvariablesinsmallsamplesacomparisonoftwomethods
AT bonettdouglasg cfawithbinaryvariablesinsmallsamplesacomparisonoftwomethods
AT bentlerpeterm cfawithbinaryvariablesinsmallsamplesacomparisonoftwomethods