77
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      The Performance of RMSEA in Models With Small Degrees of Freedom

      , ,
      Sociological Methods & Research
      SAGE Publications

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references15

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Principles and practice in reporting structural equation analyses.

          Principles for reporting analyses using structural equation modeling are reviewed, with the goal of supplying readers with complete and accurate information. It is recommended that every report give a detailed justification of the model used, along with plausible alternatives and an account of identifiability. Nonnormality and missing data problems should also be addressed. A complete set of parameters and their standard errors is desirable, and it will often be convenient to supply the correlation matrix and discrepancies, as well as goodness-of-fit indices, so that readers can exercise independent critical judgment. A survey of fairly representative studies compares recent practice with the principles of reporting recommended here.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            The robustness of test statistics to nonnormality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Reporting practices in confirmatory factor analysis: an overview and some recommendations.

              Reporting practices in 194 confirmatory factor analysis studies (1,409 factor models) published in American Psychological Association journals from 1998 to 2006 were reviewed and compared with established reporting guidelines. Three research questions were addressed: (a) how do actual reporting practices compare with published guidelines? (b) how do researchers report model fit in light of divergent perspectives on the use of ancillary fit indices (e.g., L.-T. Hu & P. M. Bentler, 1999; H. W. Marsh, K.-T., Hau, & Z. Wen, 2004)? and (c) are fit measures that support hypothesized models reported more often than fit measures that are less favorable? Results indicate some positive findings with respect to reporting practices including proposing multiple models a priori and near universal reporting of the chi-square significance test. However, many deficiencies were found such as lack of information regarding missing data and assessment of normality. Additionally, the authors found increases in reported values of some incremental fit statistics and no statistically significant evidence that researchers selectively report measures of fit that support their preferred model. Recommendations for reporting are summarized and a checklist is provided to help editors, reviewers, and authors improve reporting practices.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Sociological Methods & Research
                Sociological Methods & Research
                SAGE Publications
                0049-1241
                1552-8294
                May 12 2014
                July 24 2014
                : 44
                : 3
                : 486-507
                Article
                10.1177/0049124114543236
                33576257
                ed2f590c-7cb9-4386-b031-3d699da1616a
                © 2014
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article