File Download
There are no files associated with this item.
Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
- Publisher Website: 10.1080/10705511.2016.1189334
- Scopus: eid_2-s2.0-84974676919
- WOS: WOS:000383882200004
- Find via
Supplementary
- Citations:
- Appears in Collections:
Article: A Simulation Study of Polychoric Instrumental Variable Estimation in Structural Equation Models
Title | A Simulation Study of Polychoric Instrumental Variable Estimation in Structural Equation Models |
---|---|
Authors | |
Keywords | factor analysis model misspecification ordinal data robustness |
Issue Date | 2016 |
Citation | Structural Equation Modeling, 2016, v. 23, n. 5, p. 680-694 How to Cite? |
Abstract | Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. Data collected from questionnaires are often in ordinal scale. Unweighted least squares (ULS), diagonally weighted least squares (DWLS) and normal-theory maximum likelihood (ML) are commonly used methods to fit structural equation models. Consistency of these estimators demands no structural misspecification. In this article, we conduct a simulation study to compare the equation-by-equation polychoric instrumental variable (PIV) estimation with ULS, DWLS, and ML. Accuracy of PIV for the correctly specified model and robustness of PIV for misspecified models are investigated through a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) model and a structural equation model with ordinal indicators. The effects of sample size and nonnormality of the underlying continuous variables are also examined. The simulation results show that PIV produces robust factor loading estimates in the CFA model and in structural equation models. PIV also produces robust path coefficient estimates in the model where valid instruments are used. However, robustness highly depends on the validity of instruments. |
Persistent Identifier | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/246779 |
ISSN | 2023 Impact Factor: 2.5 2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 3.647 |
ISI Accession Number ID |
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Jin, Shaobo | - |
dc.contributor.author | Luo, Hao | - |
dc.contributor.author | Yang-Wallentin, Fan | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2017-09-26T04:27:58Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2017-09-26T04:27:58Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2016 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | Structural Equation Modeling, 2016, v. 23, n. 5, p. 680-694 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 1070-5511 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/246779 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. Data collected from questionnaires are often in ordinal scale. Unweighted least squares (ULS), diagonally weighted least squares (DWLS) and normal-theory maximum likelihood (ML) are commonly used methods to fit structural equation models. Consistency of these estimators demands no structural misspecification. In this article, we conduct a simulation study to compare the equation-by-equation polychoric instrumental variable (PIV) estimation with ULS, DWLS, and ML. Accuracy of PIV for the correctly specified model and robustness of PIV for misspecified models are investigated through a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) model and a structural equation model with ordinal indicators. The effects of sample size and nonnormality of the underlying continuous variables are also examined. The simulation results show that PIV produces robust factor loading estimates in the CFA model and in structural equation models. PIV also produces robust path coefficient estimates in the model where valid instruments are used. However, robustness highly depends on the validity of instruments. | - |
dc.language | eng | - |
dc.relation.ispartof | Structural Equation Modeling | - |
dc.subject | factor analysis | - |
dc.subject | model misspecification | - |
dc.subject | ordinal data | - |
dc.subject | robustness | - |
dc.title | A Simulation Study of Polychoric Instrumental Variable Estimation in Structural Equation Models | - |
dc.type | Article | - |
dc.description.nature | link_to_subscribed_fulltext | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1080/10705511.2016.1189334 | - |
dc.identifier.scopus | eid_2-s2.0-84974676919 | - |
dc.identifier.hkuros | 293061 | - |
dc.identifier.volume | 23 | - |
dc.identifier.issue | 5 | - |
dc.identifier.spage | 680 | - |
dc.identifier.epage | 694 | - |
dc.identifier.eissn | 1532-8007 | - |
dc.identifier.isi | WOS:000383882200004 | - |
dc.identifier.issnl | 1070-5511 | - |