Literature DB >> 26776890

Common Factor Analysis Versus Principal Component Analysis: Differential Bias in Representing Model Parameters?

K F Widaman.   

Abstract

The aim of the present article was to reconsider several conclusions by Velicer and Jackson (1990a) in their review of issues that arise when comparing common factor analysis and principal component analysis. Specifically, the three conclusions by Velicer and Jackson that are considered in the present article are: (a) that common factor and principal component solutions are similar, (b) that differences between common factor and principal component solutions appear only when too many dimensions are extracted, and (c) that common factor and principal component parameters are equally generalizable. In contrast, Snook and Gorsuch (1989) argued recently that principal component analysis and common factor analysis led to different, dissimilar estimates of pattern loadings, terming the principal component loadings biased and the common factor loadings unbiased. In the present article, after replicating the Snook and Gorsuch results, an extension demonstrated that the difference between common factor and principal component pattern loadings is inversely related to the number of indicators per factor, not to the total number of observed variables in the analysis, countering claims by both Snook and Gorsuch and Velicer and Jackson. Considering the more general case of oblique factors, one concomitant of overrepresentation of pattern loadings is an underrepresentation of intercorrelations among dimensions represented by principal component analysis, whereas comparable values obtained using factor analysis are accurate. Differences in parameters deriving from principal component analysis and common factor analysis were explored in relation to several additional aspects of population data, such as variation in the level of communality of variables on a given factor and the moving of a variable from one battery of measures to another. The results suggest that principal component analysis should not be used if a researcher wishes to obtain parameters reflecting latent constructs or factors.

Entities:  

Year:  1993        PMID: 26776890     DOI: 10.1207/s15327906mbr2803_1

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


  28 in total

1.  Can parental bonding be assessed in children? Factor structure and factorial invariance of the Parental Bonding Instrument (PBI) between adults and children.

Authors:  Ioannis Tsaousis; Katerina Mascha; Theodoros Giovazolias
Journal:  Child Psychiatry Hum Dev       Date:  2012-04

2.  Comprehensive Psychometric Analysis of the Eyberg Child Behavior Inventory in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder.

Authors:  Kathryn Jeter; Kimberly Zlomke; Paul Shawler; Maureen Sullivan
Journal:  J Autism Dev Disord       Date:  2017-05

3.  Deriving SF-12v2 physical and mental health summary scores: a comparison of different scoring algorithms.

Authors:  John A Fleishman; Alfredo J Selim; Lewis E Kazis
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2010-01-22       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  Assessing Children's Homework Performance: Development of Multi-Dimensional, Multi-Informant Rating Scales.

Authors:  Thomas J Power; Stefan C Dombrowski; Marley W Watkins; Jennifer A Mautone; John W Eagle
Journal:  J Sch Psychol       Date:  2007-06

5.  Regularized Generalized Canonical Correlation Analysis: A Framework for Sequential Multiblock Component Methods.

Authors:  Michel Tenenhaus; Arthur Tenenhaus; Patrick J F Groenen
Journal:  Psychometrika       Date:  2017-05-23       Impact factor: 2.500

6.  Further psychometric analysis of the 20-item Partner Interaction Questionnaire in an adult sample of smokers.

Authors:  Augustine Osman; Nancy Amodei; R J Lamb
Journal:  Psychol Addict Behav       Date:  2019-06-13

7.  Depression is not a consistent syndrome: An investigation of unique symptom patterns in the STAR*D study.

Authors:  Eiko I Fried; Randolph M Nesse
Journal:  J Affect Disord       Date:  2014-10-14       Impact factor: 4.839

8.  The development and validation of the Memory Support Rating Scale.

Authors:  Jason Y Lee; Frank C Worrell; Allison G Harvey
Journal:  Psychol Assess       Date:  2015-09-21

9.  Measurement equivalence of the brief comprehensive effects of alcohol scale in a multiethnic sample of college students.

Authors:  Lindsay S Ham; Yijie Wang; Su Yeong Kim; Byron L Zamboanga
Journal:  J Clin Psychol       Date:  2012-07-25

10.  Investigating the performance of exploratory graph analysis and traditional techniques to identify the number of latent factors: A simulation and tutorial.

Authors:  Hudson Golino; Dingjing Shi; Alexander P Christensen; Luis Eduardo Garrido; Maria Dolores Nieto; Ritu Sadana; Jotheeswaran Amuthavalli Thiyagarajan; Agustin Martinez-Molina
Journal:  Psychol Methods       Date:  2020-03-19
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.