Literature DB >> 26771126

2001 Presidential Address: Working with Imperfect Models.

Robert C MacCallum.   

Abstract

Since the early years of psychological research, investigators in psychology have made use of mathematical models of psychological phenomena. Models are now routinely used to represent and study cognitive processes, the structure of psychological measurements, the structure of correlational relationships among variables, the nature of change over time, and many other topics and phenomena of interest. All of these models, in their attempt to provide a parsimonious representation of psychological phenomena, are wrong to some degree and are thus implausible if taken literally. Such models simply cannot fully represent the complexities of the phenomena of interest and at best provide an approximation of the real world. This imperfection has implications for how we specify, estimate, and evaluate models, and how we interpret results of fitting models to data. Using factor analysis and structural equation models as a context, I examine some implications of model imperfection for our use of models, focusing on formal specification of models; the nature of parameters and parameter estimates; the relevance of discrepancy functions; the issue of sample size; the evaluation, development, and selection of models; and the conduct of simulation studies. The overall perspective is that our use and study of models should be guided by an understanding that our models are imperfect and cannot be made to be exactly correct.

Year:  2003        PMID: 26771126     DOI: 10.1207/S15327906MBR3801_5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Multivariate Behav Res        ISSN: 0027-3171            Impact factor:   5.923


  27 in total

1.  Coefficient α as a Measure of Test Score Reliability: Review of 3 Popular Misconceptions.

Authors:  Osvaldo F Morera; Sonya M Stokes
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 9.308

2.  Core dimensions of anxiety and depression change independently during adolescence.

Authors:  Christopher C Conway; Richard E Zinbarg; Susan Mineka; Michelle G Craske
Journal:  J Abnorm Psychol       Date:  2017-02

3.  Advances in Modeling Model Discrepancy: Comment on Wu and Browne (2015).

Authors:  Robert C MacCallum; Anthony O'Hagan
Journal:  Psychometrika       Date:  2015-03-27       Impact factor: 2.500

4.  A Sandwich Standard Error Estimator for Exploratory Factor Analysis With Nonnormal Data and Imperfect Models.

Authors:  Guangjian Zhang; Kristopher J Preacher; Minami Hattori; Ge Jiang; Lauren A Trichtinger
Journal:  Appl Psychol Meas       Date:  2018-09-14

5.  Understanding the Model Size Effect on SEM Fit Indices.

Authors:  Dexin Shi; Taehun Lee; Alberto Maydeu-Olivares
Journal:  Educ Psychol Meas       Date:  2018-06-29       Impact factor: 2.821

6.  Incremental Model Fit Assessment in the Case of Categorical Data: Tucker-Lewis Index for Item Response Theory Modeling.

Authors:  Li Cai; Seung Won Chung; Taehun Lee
Journal:  Prev Sci       Date:  2021-05-10

7.  A Penalized Likelihood Method for Structural Equation Modeling.

Authors:  Po-Hsien Huang; Hung Chen; Li-Jen Weng
Journal:  Psychometrika       Date:  2017-04-17       Impact factor: 2.500

8.  Asymptotics of AIC, BIC, and RMSEA for Model Selection in Structural Equation Modeling.

Authors:  Po-Hsien Huang
Journal:  Psychometrika       Date:  2017-04-26       Impact factor: 2.500

Review 9.  Effects of cognitive training on the structure of intelligence.

Authors:  John Protzko
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2017-08

10.  Creating Misspecified Models in Moment Structure Analysis.

Authors:  Keke Lai
Journal:  Psychometrika       Date:  2019-01-09       Impact factor: 2.500

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.