Journals / Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi / 2013 / Cilt: 0 - Sayı: 38

Effects of model misspecification, sample size and estimation methods on structural equation modeling fit indices

Model belirlemesi, örneklem hacmi ve tahmin yönteminin yapısal eşitlik modelleri uyum ölçütlerine etkisi

Pages
239–252
Publication Date
2022-10-11
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)

In this study, a Monte Carlo simulation study was conducted to investigate the effects on structural equation modeling (SEM) fit indices of, model specification, sample size and estimation method.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) is a relatively new method, having its roots in the 1970s.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Most applications have been in psychology, sociology, the biological sciences, educational research, political science, and market research.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In this study, a Monte Carlo simulation study was conducted to investigate the effects on structural equation modeling (SEM) fit indices of, model specification, sample size and estimation method.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) is a relatively new method, having its roots in the 1970s. Most applications have been in psychology, sociology, the biological sciences, educational research, political science, and market research. SEM is a modeling technique that can handle a large number of endogenous and exogenous variables, as well as latent variables specified as linear combinations of the observed variables. Because of this reason, the assessment of model fit in structural equation modeling (SEM) has long been a difficult issue in SEM applications. The use of Monte Carlo (MC) simulations for empirical assessment of statistical estimators and model fit is becoming more common in structural equation modeling. In this study, a Monte Carlo simulation study was conducted to investigate the effects on structural equation modeling (SEM) fit indices of, model specification, sample size and estimation method.

Özet

Yapısal Eşitlik modelleri (YEM), ortaya çıkışı 1970’lere dayanan yeni bir metottur. Birçok araştırmacı tarafından, psikolojide, sosyolojide, biyolojide, eğitim araştırmalarında, politik bilimlerde ve pazarlama araştırmalarında kullanılmaktadır. YEM gözlenen değişkenlerin lineer bileşimi olarak yazılabilen çok sayıda içsel ve dışsal gizil değişkeni birlikte ele alan bir modelleme yöntemidir. Bu yüzden, YEM araştırmalarında model uyumunun değerlendirilmesi zorlu bir konudur. YEM’de model uyumunun deneysel olarak değerlendirilmesi ve istatistiksel tahminlerin elde edilmesinde Monte Carlo (MC) simülasyonu yaygın olarak kullanılmaya başlanmıştır. Bu çalışmada, model belirlemesinin, örneklem hacminin ve tahmin yönteminin YEM’de kullanılan uyum ölçütlerine etkisi, bir MC simülasyonu düzenlenerek araştırılmıştır.

🔖

Cite This Article

ŞEN, R., YILMAZ, V. (2022). Effects of model misspecification, sample size and estimation methods on structural equation modeling fit indices. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 0 - Sayı: 38, 239–252. https://ajindex.com/articles/493114

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. BEARDEN, W.O., SHARMA, S. and TEEL, J. E. (1982). “Sample Size Effects on Chi Square and Other Statistics Used in Evaluating Causal Models”, Journal of Marketing Research, 19: 425-430.
  2. BENTLER, P.M. and BONETT, D.G. (1980). “Significance Tests and Goodness of Fit in the Analysis of Covariance Structures”, Psychological Bulletin, 88, 3: 588-606.
  3. BENTLER, P. M. (1990). “Comperative Fit Index in Structural Models”, Psychogical Bulletin, 10, 2: 238-246.
  4. BOLLEN, K. A. (1989). Structural Equations with Latent Variables. New York: Wiley. ENDERS, C. and FİNLEY, S. (2003). “SEM Fit Index Criteria Re-Examined: An Investigation of ML And Robust Fit Indices in Complex Models”, Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago. FAN, X. and WANG, L. (1998). “Effects of Potantial Confounding Factors on Fit Indices and Parameter Estimates for True and Misspesified SEM Models”, Educational and Psychological Measurement, 58: 699-733.
  5. FAN, X., THOMPSON, B. and WANG, L. (1999). “Effects of Sample Size, Estimation Methods, and Model Specification on Structural Equation Modeling Fit Indexes”, Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 1: 56-83.
  6. FAN, X. and SİVO, S.A. (2005). “Sensitivity of Fit Indices to Model Misspecified Structural or Measurement Model Components: Rationale of Two-Index Strategy Revisited”, Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 12, 3: 343-367.
  7. FAN, X. and SİVO, S.A. (2007). “Sensitivity of Fit Indices to Model Misspecification and Model Types”, Multivariate Behavioral Research, 42,3: 509-529.
  8. FAN, Xitao and FAN, Xiaotao (2005). “Using SAS for Monte Carlo Simulation Research in SEM”, Structural Equation Modeling, 12, 2: 299-333.
  9. GERBİNG, D. W. and ANDERSON, J. C. (1993). “Monte Carlo Evaluation of Goodness-of-Fit Indices for Structural Equation Models”, Testing Structural Equation Models, K. A. Bollen and J. S. Long (Eds.), Newport Beach, CA: Sage, 40-65.
  10. GOLOB, T.F. (2003). “Structural Equation Modeling for Travel Behavior Research”, Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 37: 1-25.
  11. HU, L. and BENTLER, P. M. (1998). “Fit Indices in Covariance Structure Modeling: Sensitivity to Under Parameterized Model Misspecification”, Psychological Methods, 3: 424-453.
  12. HU, L. and BENTLER, P. M. (1999). “Cutoff Criteria for Fit Indexes in Covariance Structure Analysis: Conventional Criteria Versus New Alternatives”, Structural Equation Modeling, 6: 1-55.
  13. KAPLAN, D. (2000). Structu