Literature DB >> 32158020

Using Fit Statistic Differences to Determine the Optimal Number of Factors to Retain in an Exploratory Factor Analysis.

W Holmes Finch1.   

Abstract

Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) is widely used by researchers in the social sciences to characterize the latent structure underlying a set of observed indicator variables. One of the primary issues that must be resolved when conducting an EFA is determination of the number of factors to retain. There exist a large number of statistical tools designed to address this question, with none being universally optimal across applications. Recently, researchers have investigated the use of model fit indices that are commonly used in the conduct of confirmatory factor analysis to determine the number of factors to retain in EFA. These results have yielded mixed results, appearing to be effective when used in conjunction with normally distributed indicators, but not being as effective for categorical indicators. The purpose of this simulation study was to compare the performance of difference values for several fit indices as a method for identifying the optimal number of factors to retain in an EFA, with parallel analysis, which is one of the most reliable such extant methods. Results of the simulation demonstrated that the use of fit index difference values outperformed parallel analysis for categorical indicators, and for normally distributed indicators when factor loadings were small. Implications of these findings are discussed.
© The Author(s) 2019.

Entities:  

Keywords:  CFI; RMSEA; comparative fit index; exploratory factor analysis; model fit statistics; parallel analysis; root mean square error of approximation

Year:  2019        PMID: 32158020      PMCID: PMC7047263          DOI: 10.1177/0013164419865769

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Educ Psychol Meas        ISSN: 0013-1644            Impact factor:   2.821


  17 in total

1.  Choosing the Optimal Number of Factors in Exploratory Factor Analysis: A Model Selection Perspective.

Authors:  Kristopher J Preacher; Guangjian Zhang; Cheongtag Kim; Gerhard Mels
Journal:  Multivariate Behav Res       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 5.923

2.  Very Simple Structure: An Alternative Procedure For Estimating The Optimal Number Of Interpretable Factors.

Authors:  W Revelle; T Rocklin
Journal:  Multivariate Behav Res       Date:  1979-10-01       Impact factor: 5.923

3.  Are fit indices really fit to estimate the number of factors with categorical variables? Some cautionary findings via Monte Carlo simulation.

Authors:  Luis Eduardo Garrido; Francisco José Abad; Vicente Ponsoda
Journal:  Psychol Methods       Date:  2015-12-14

4.  Fit Indices Versus Test Statistics.

Authors:  Ke-Hai Yuan
Journal:  Multivariate Behav Res       Date:  2005-01-01       Impact factor: 5.923

5.  Item factor analysis: current approaches and future directions.

Authors:  R J Wirth; Michael C Edwards
Journal:  Psychol Methods       Date:  2007-03

6.  Type I and Type II Error Rates and Overall Accuracy of the Revised Parallel Analysis Method for Determining the Number of Factors.

Authors:  Samuel B Green; Marilyn S Thompson; Roy Levy; Wen-Juo Lo
Journal:  Educ Psychol Meas       Date:  2014-08-14       Impact factor: 2.821

7.  Accuracy of Revised and Traditional Parallel Analyses for Assessing Dimensionality with Binary Data.

Authors:  Samuel B Green; Nickalus Redell; Marilyn S Thompson; Roy Levy
Journal:  Educ Psychol Meas       Date:  2015-04-21       Impact factor: 2.821

8.  EVALUATION OF A NEW MEAN SCALED AND MOMENT ADJUSTED TEST STATISTIC FOR SEM.

Authors:  Xiaoxiao Tong; Peter M Bentler
Journal:  Struct Equ Modeling       Date:  2013-01-29       Impact factor: 6.125

9.  Relative Accuracy of Two Modified Parallel Analysis Methods that Use the Proper Reference Distribution.

Authors:  Samuel Green; Yuning Xu; Marilyn S Thompson
Journal:  Educ Psychol Meas       Date:  2017-07-17       Impact factor: 2.821

10.  Buprenorphine medication-assisted treatment during pregnancy: An exploratory factor analysis associated with adherence.

Authors:  Jessica L Coker; David Catlin; Shona Ray-Griffith; Bettina Knight; Zachary N Stowe
Journal:  Drug Alcohol Depend       Date:  2018-09-15       Impact factor: 4.492

View more
  6 in total

1.  Dynamic fit index cutoffs for one-factor models.

Authors:  Daniel McNeish; Melissa G Wolf
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2022-05-18

2.  Modeling the Speeded Determinants of Adolescents' Academic and Attentional Functioning.

Authors:  Holly N Wakeman; Daniel R Leopold; Richard K Olson; Erik G Willcutt
Journal:  Dev Neuropsychol       Date:  2021-12-12       Impact factor: 2.113

3.  COVID-19 and Pro-environmental Behaviour at Destinations Amongst International Travellers.

Authors:  Gary Calder; Aleksandar Radic; Hyungseo Bobby Ryu; Antonio Ariza-Montes; Heesup Han
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2022-04-14

4.  Crafting work-nonwork balance involving life domain boundaries: Development and validation of a novel scale across five countries.

Authors:  Philipp Kerksieck; Rebecca Brauchli; Jessica de Bloom; Akihito Shimazu; Miika Kujanpää; Madeleine Lanz; Georg F Bauer
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2022-09-16

5.  A measurement invariance analysis of selected Opioid Overdose Knowledge Scale (OOKS) items among bystanders and first responders.

Authors:  James A Swartz; Qiao Lin; Yerim Kim
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-10-14       Impact factor: 3.752

6.  Psychometric properties of the adapted instrument European Health Literacy Survey Questionnaire short-short form.

Authors:  Fábio Luiz Mialhe; Katarinne Lima Moraes; Fernanda Maria Rovai Bado; Virginia Visconde Brasil; Helena Alves De Carvalho Sampaio; Flávio Rebustini
Journal:  Rev Lat Am Enfermagem       Date:  2021-07-02
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.