SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Eğitimde ve Psikolojide Ölçme ve Değerlendirme Dergisi / 2015 / Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 2

Comparison of Different Estimation Methods for Categorical and Ordinal Data in Confirmatory Factor Analysis

Hakan KOĞAR
Esin YILMAZ KOĞAR
Pages
0–0
Publication Date
2016-01-02
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

As a result, ULS method can converge with the minimum number iterations and it seems to be the more accurate method for estimating the parameters.Key Words: Confirmatıry factor analysis, weighted least square, unweighted least square, diagonally weighted least square

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), which is used quite often for scale development and adaptation studies, the selected estimation method, affects the results obtained from the data.
📊
Key Findings & Data:So that, the purpose of this research is to compare the performance of different estimation methods for CFA.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:As a result, ULS method can converge with the minimum number iterations and it seems to be the more accurate method for estimating the parameters.Key Words: Confirmatıry factor analysis, weighted least square, unweighted least square, diagonally weighted least square
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

In confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), which is used quite often for scale development and adaptation studies, the selected estimation method, affects the results obtained from the data. Because of the selected estimation method, the model parameters and their standard errors, and the model data fit values may alter the results substantially. So that, the purpose of this research is to compare the performance of different estimation methods for CFA. Maximum likelihood (ML), unweighted least squares (ULS) and diagonally weighted least squares (DWLS) are used in this research as estimation methods. These methods are applied in data sets and regression coefficients and their standard errors, t values, fit indexes and iteration numbers obtained from these estimation methods are examined. As a result, ULS method can converge with the minimum number iterations and it seems to be the more accurate method for estimating the parameters.Key Words: Confirmatıry factor analysis, weighted least square, unweighted least square, diagonally weighted least square

🔖

Cite This Article

KOĞAR, H., KOĞAR, E. Y. (2016). Comparison of Different Estimation Methods for Categorical and Ordinal Data in Confirmatory Factor Analysis. Eğitimde ve Psikolojide Ölçme ve Değerlendirme Dergisi, Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 2, 0–0. https://ajindex.com/articles/137443

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (4)

  1. Babakus, E. (1985). The sensitivity of maximum likelihood factor analysis given violations of interval scale and multivariate normality (Doctoral dissertation, The University of Alabama). Babakus, E., Ferguson, C. E., & Joreskog, K. G. (1987). The sensitivity of confirmatory maximum likelihood factor analysis to violations of measurement scale and distributional assumptions. Journal of Marketing Research, 37, 72-141.
  2. Bandalos, D. L. (2014). Relative performance of categorical diagonally weighted least squares and robust maximum likelihood estimation. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 21, 102 – 116. Beauducel, A., & Herzberg, P. Y. (2006). On the performance of maximum likelihood versus means and variance adjusted weighted least squares estimation in CFA. Structural Equation Modeling, 13, 186 – 203. Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons. Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York, N. J.: Guiford Press.
  3. Byrne, B. M. (1998). Structural Equation Modeling with LISREL, PRELIS, and SIMPLIS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, N. J. Cai, J. (2008). Structural equation modeling analysis with correlated ordered and unordered categorical data (Doctorial dissertation, The Chinese University of Hong Kong). Deryakulu, D. & Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2002). Epistemolojik inanç ölçeğinin geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Eğitim Araştırmaları, 8, 111– 125. Deryakulu, D., & Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2005). Epistemolojik inanç ölçeğinin faktör yapısının yeniden incelenmesi: cinsiyet ve öğrenim görülen program türüne göre epistemolojik inançların karşılaştırılması. Eğitim Araştırmaları, 18, 57 – 70. Dinler-İçöz, S. (2014). İşitme engelli çocuğa sahip olan ve olmayan annelerin umutsuzluk düzeylerinin incelenmesi (Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Ankara Üniversitesi,
  4. Fen Bilimleri Fakültesi, Ankara). DiStefano, C. (2002). The impact of categorization with confirmatory factor analysis. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 327 – 346. Flora, D. B., & Curran, P. J. (2004). An empirical evaluation of alternative methods of estimation for confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data. Psychological Methods, 9, 466 – 491. Forero, C. G., Maydeu-Olivares, A., & Gallardo-Pujol, D. (2009). Factor analysis with ordinal indicators: A monte carlo study comparing DWLS and ULS estimation. Structural Equation Modeling, 16, 625 –641. Green, S. B., Akey, T. M., F