Exam 2 Flashcards
(43 cards)
Describe the primary advantages of structural equation modeling.
- Reduces measurement error by having multiple indicators of a latent variable
- Can test overall models and indiv. Parameters
- Can statistically compare nested and non-nested models
- Can test models with multiple DVs
- Can model mediator variables (i.e., processes)
- Can model error terms
- Can model relations across groups, across time.
What is the goal of SEM?
develop a model that explains why observed variables are related (i.e., explains the variance-covariance matrix).
What are the similarities between CFA and SEM?
- Both model shared variance amongst variables (unique variance becomes error).
- Both provide factor loadings: direct relations between observed and latent variables
- Factor variances/covariances (when standardized, these are factor correlations)
Explain confirmatory factor analysis.
- A priori measurement model: THIS IS NOT AN EXPLANATORY MODEL.
- Models direct relations between observed and latent variable(s)
What are the types of variables in SEM?
- Observed (OV): measured (items, subscales, scales)
2. Latent (LV): theoretical constructs defined by the observed variables
What is the goal of SEM?
Goal is to model the commonality in the observed variables (as in factor analysis)
Then examine relations between LVs (as in multiple regression)
What are the types of latent variables (LVs)?
- Exogenous: LVs that “cause” other LVs
- Endogenous: LVs that are caused by other LVs
- Pure DVs are only “caused”
- Mediators are a “cause” and a “caused”
What are the 10 commandments of SEM according to Thompson?
- Do not make conclusions that one model definitely describes data.
- After modifying models, re-test your model on an independent sample.
- Test multiple models, not just one.
- Evaluate measurement models prior to evaluating a structural model (we can still adjust the measurement model after the fact if the structural model indicates that would be beneficial).
- Use multiple criteria to evaluate model fit, to account for theoretical and practical considerations.
- Use multiple fit statistics.
- If your multivariate test requires normality, makes sure your observed variables can also be normally distributed.
- All other things equal, more parsimonious models, they are less likely to be “nearly just-identified”.
- Consider scale and distribution of variables (measured/observed) when selecting matrix of associations to analyze.
- Do NOT use SEM with small samples.
Using your own example, describe a structural equation model with 4 latent
variables, each with 3 indicators. As part of your answer, write the equations that
would test your model.
4 LVs X 3 Indicators = 12 DVs – you write an equation for each DV • S1 = l(Academic Self-Esteem) + e1 • S2 = l(Academic Self-Esteem) + e2 • ..... • S5 = l(Relationship Self-Esteem) + e5 • S6 = l(Relationship Self-Esteem) + e6 • .... • S9 = l(Exercise) + e6 • S10 = l(Exercise) + e6 • S11 = l(Diet) + e6 • S12 = l(Diet) + e6
– l represents a regression coefficient (factor loading)
– e represents error (or residual)
OV1 = l(LV) + e1 e.g., BDI = l11(Depression) + e1 relation among latent variables endogenous LV = b(exogenous LV) + d1 Depression LV = b21(Coping LV) + d1
these equations imply a model
this model attempts to explain the variance-covariance matrix (S)
i.e., relations among observed variables
Lambda: the weight, partial relationship b/w the observed var and outcome
These regression models imply a model. If your model fits well, the implied correlations look like the original correlations.
Explain to me how a confirmatory factor analysis is conducted.
- Design a measurement model we hypothesize will fit the data well.
- WE ESTIMATE THE MODEL USING MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD ESTIMATION
• In order for the model to run, we need to specify the scale of a latent variable in CFA: we can either fix the variance of the LV to 1, or fix a factor loading for each LV to 1.
With CFA, how do we determine model fit?
WE DETERMINE MODEL FIT ON TWO LEVELS: THE OVERALL MODEL FIT, AND THE INDIVIDUAL PARAMETER FIT.
Define overall model fit in context of CFA/SEM.
We assess the fit of our measurement model by using several indices: the comparative fit index (CFI) with values greater than .95 indicating reasonable model fit and values greater than .90 indicating a plausible model, Root Mean Square Error of approximation (RMSEA)— an absolute index of overall model fit with values less than .08 indicative acceptable model fit and values less than .05 indicative of good model fit, and the Standardized Root Mean Residual (SRMR) an absolute index of overall model fit with values less than .08 indicative acceptable model fit and values less than .05 indicative of good model fit. We also report the chi-square goodness of fit test, for completeness.
Define individual parameter fit in context of CFA/SEM.
If our model fits well descriptively, we would interpret the parameters of the model (i.e., the factor loadings and the interfactor correlation, if there are multiple factors).
o The statistical tests we use for the factor loadings and covariances are the critical ratios (CRs), these are distributed as z-values. These CRs have p-values associated, we want them to be < 0.05.
o If the parametesr do not fit, we report that, and then respecify the model.
Define some practical issues to be aware of in CFA
o Identification: we need our model to have enough DF (to be at least just-identified) in order to run the model.
o DF = nonredundant elements in S (the var/covar matrix)
-parameters estimated elements in S = # variances & covariances
-this equals p (p+1) / 2, where p = # OVs
-parameters estimated:
• count up factor loadings, factor covariances, and IV variances estimated
What are modification indices?
Modification indices are useful when our model is ill-fitting and we need to consider changing it. They can be used to build a well-fitting model. They should not be used to generate theory, since they are purely math-driven, and might not make any theoretical sense. If we use modification indices, we need to be extremely careful, as SEM is a theory-driven technique.
Describe the goal(s) of multiple group analysis.
compare model fit across groups
groups can be “anything” (e.g. gender, ethnicity, age, disorder, etc.
How do you conduct MGA?
- establish a baseline measurement model and fit for that model separately in each group using CFA
- establish baseline fit of the structural model using SEM
- Assess for invariance across groups in the following parameters:
- factor loadings
- factor variances/covarianes
- structural/path coefficients - test each group to a baseline model
What is configural or pattern invariance?
- Configural or pattern invariance: Do the groups have the same parameters? We tst this by fitting the “best” model in each group.
What is metric invariance?
Only factor loadings are constrained to be invariant (equal) across groups. All other model parameters are freely estimated for each group separately (including factor variances/covariances, error variances).
i. With this model, you explicitly fix the value of each of these factors to be the same between the groups we care about comparing.
ii. If these constraints are true, then these loadings are equivalent between these two groups. If it’s true (we have measurement equivalence), then our model should fit well (we’re measuring the same construct in these two groups equivalently.
iii. This model is going to have more DF because we’re estimating fewer parameters (only factor loadings, but we’re saying they’re the same for males and females). This is a more parsimonious model.
iv. This model here is nested within the step-1 models. This model is relative to the configural invariance in step 1.
What is the factor variance/covariance invariance estimation?
i. Factor loadings are constrained to be invariant across groups (as in step 2)
ii. Factor variances/covariances are constrained to be invariant across groups
iii. Only error variances are freely estimated in each group separately.
Summarize the model steps that you go through with Multiple Group Analysis (MGA).
Model 1: Free estimation
Model 2: constrains factor loadings b/w groups
Model 3: constrains factor variance/covariance across groups
If model 3 fits best, we have the utmost confidence that we’re measuring the same construct in each group.
What is the chi square difference test?
To determine which model fits best, we use the chi-square difference test. If the chi-square is significant, then the baseline model fits better. If not significant, metric invariance fits better (more parsimonious).
• Difference in chi square = chi square more restrictive/More Parameters - chi square less restrictive/Fewer Parameters
• Difference in df = df more restrictive – dfless restrictive
Describe how one conducts a multiple group confirmatory factor analysis.
Our overall goal in MGA is to compare model fit across groups (e.g., gender). Basic question: are the groups equal (in terms of their model parameters)?
We determine model fit in the same way we do in SEM/CFA by using model fit indices (RMSEA, CFI, and SRMR), chi-square test for completeness, modification indices.
First, we establish a baseline fit of the measurement model in each group (using CFA)
Second, we establish the baseline fit of the structural model in each group (using SEM)
Third, we test the invariance across groups for the factor loadings, factor variances/covariances, and structural/path coefficients.
How to establish invariance in the measurement model:
- Configural or pattern invariance: the same parameters exist for all groups (e.g., same four factor loadings in both male and female models). We do this by testing the “best”/baseline model in each group.
- Metric invariance: We constrain the factor loadings to be equal across groups, all other model parameters are estimated freely for each group (including factor variances/covariances and error variances).
- Factor variance/covariance invariance: factor loadings still constrained to be equal, factor variances/covariances also constrained to be equal, only error variances are freely estimated.
Next, we interpret invariance at each step:
• Configural invariance: In this case, we have the “same” latent variable(s) in each group. I.e., “we eye-ball the factor loadings and make sure they’re in the same direction/approx. magnitude across groups
• Metric invariance: “we test what we eye-balled in the previous step”. If we have this, then we have the same LV in each group.
o The item has the same scaling units across groups
o This is a requirement in order to make substantive comparisons between groups on the LV
• Factor variances: groups use the same range of the construct continuum. i.e., the variance on the LV is the same across groups.
• Factor covariances: if these are equal, then we have the same associations between factor loadings across groups.