Literature DB >> 33994560

Incorporating Uncertainty Into Parallel Analysis for Choosing the Number of Factors via Bayesian Methods.

Roy Levy1, Yan Xia2, Samuel B Green1.   

Abstract

A number of psychometricians have suggested that parallel analysis (PA) tends to yield more accurate results in determining the number of factors in comparison with other statistical methods. Nevertheless, all too often PA can suggest an incorrect number of factors, particularly in statistically unfavorable conditions (e.g., small sample sizes and low factor loadings). Because of this, researchers have recommended using multiple methods to make judgments about the number of factors to extract. Implicit in this recommendation is that, when the number of factors is chosen based on PA, uncertainty nevertheless exists. We propose a Bayesian parallel analysis (B-PA) method to incorporate the uncertainty with decisions about the number of factors. B-PA yields a probability distribution for the various possible numbers of factors. We implement and compare B-PA with a frequentist approach, revised parallel analysis (R-PA), in the contexts of real and simulated data. Results show that B-PA provides relevant information regarding the uncertainty in determining the number of factors, particularly under conditions with small sample sizes, low factor loadings, and less distinguishable factors. Even if the indicated number of factors with the highest probability is incorrect, B-PA can show a sizable probability of retaining the correct number of factors. Interestingly, when the mode of the distribution of the probabilities associated with different numbers of factors was treated as the number of factors to retain, B-PA was somewhat more accurate than R-PA in a majority of the conditions.
© The Author(s) 2020.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bayesian analysis; dimensionality assessment; exploratory factor analysis; parallel analysis

Year:  2020        PMID: 33994560      PMCID: PMC8072949          DOI: 10.1177/0013164420942806

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Educ Psychol Meas        ISSN: 0013-1644            Impact factor:   3.088


  13 in total

1.  Remarks on Parallel Analysis.

Authors:  A Buja; N Eyuboglu
Journal:  Multivariate Behav Res       Date:  1992-10-01       Impact factor: 5.923

2.  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

3.  Determining the number of factors using parallel analysis and its recent variants.

Authors:  Sangdon Lim; Seungmin Jahng
Journal:  Psychol Methods       Date:  2019-06-10

4.  The Bayesian New Statistics: Hypothesis testing, estimation, meta-analysis, and power analysis from a Bayesian perspective.

Authors:  John K Kruschke; Torrin M Liddell
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2018-02

5.  Proportion of Indicator Common Variance Due to a Factor as an Effect Size Statistic in Revised Parallel Analysis.

Authors:  Yan Xia; Samuel B Green; Yuning Xu; Marilyn S Thompson
Journal:  Educ Psychol Meas       Date:  2018-02-07       Impact factor: 2.821

6.  Bayesian structural equation modeling: a more flexible representation of substantive theory.

Authors:  Bengt Muthén; Tihomir Asparouhov
Journal:  Psychol Methods       Date:  2012-09

7.  Sparse Bayesian infinite factor models.

Authors:  A Bhattacharya; D B Dunson
Journal:  Biometrika       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 2.445

8.  Invited Paper: The Rediscovery of Bifactor Measurement Models.

Authors:  Steven P Reise
Journal:  Multivariate Behav Res       Date:  2012-09-01       Impact factor: 5.923

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.  How to determine the number of factors to retain in exploratory factor analysis: A comparison of extraction methods under realistic conditions.

Authors:  Max Auerswald; Morten Moshagen
Journal:  Psychol Methods       Date:  2019-01-21
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.