Comparison of the K1 Rule, Parallel Analysis, and the Bass-Ackward Method on Identifying the Number of Factors in Factor Analysis

IF 2.3 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Lingbo Tong, Wen Qu, Zhiyong Zhang
{"title":"Comparison of the K1 Rule, Parallel Analysis, and the Bass-Ackward Method on Identifying the Number of Factors in Factor Analysis","authors":"Lingbo Tong, Wen Qu, Zhiyong Zhang","doi":"10.1007/s40647-024-00423-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Factor analysis is widely utilized to identify latent factors underlying the observed variables. This paper presents a comprehensive comparative study of two widely used methods for determining the optimal number of factors in factor analysis, the K1 rule, and parallel analysis, along with a more recently developed method, the bass-ackward method. We provide an in-depth exploration of these techniques, discussing their historical development, advantages, and limitations. Using a series of Monte Carlo simulations, we assess the efficacy of these methods in accurately determining the appropriate number of factors. Specifically, we examine two cessation criteria within the bass-ackward framework: BA-maxLoading and BA-cutoff. Our findings offer nuanced insights into the performance of these methods under various conditions, illuminating their respective advantages and potential pitfalls. To enhance accessibility, we create an online visualization tool tailored to the factor structures generated by the bass-ackward method. This research enriches the understanding of factor analysis methodology, assists researchers in method selection, and facilitates comprehensive interpretation of latent factor structures.</p>","PeriodicalId":43537,"journal":{"name":"Fudan Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences","volume":"20 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Fudan Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1092","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40647-024-00423-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Factor analysis is widely utilized to identify latent factors underlying the observed variables. This paper presents a comprehensive comparative study of two widely used methods for determining the optimal number of factors in factor analysis, the K1 rule, and parallel analysis, along with a more recently developed method, the bass-ackward method. We provide an in-depth exploration of these techniques, discussing their historical development, advantages, and limitations. Using a series of Monte Carlo simulations, we assess the efficacy of these methods in accurately determining the appropriate number of factors. Specifically, we examine two cessation criteria within the bass-ackward framework: BA-maxLoading and BA-cutoff. Our findings offer nuanced insights into the performance of these methods under various conditions, illuminating their respective advantages and potential pitfalls. To enhance accessibility, we create an online visualization tool tailored to the factor structures generated by the bass-ackward method. This research enriches the understanding of factor analysis methodology, assists researchers in method selection, and facilitates comprehensive interpretation of latent factor structures.

Abstract Image

K1 法则、平行分析法和 Bass-Ackward 法在因子分析中确定因子个数的比较
因子分析被广泛用于识别观测变量背后的潜在因子。本文对因子分析中两种广泛使用的确定最佳因子数的方法--K1 规则和平行分析法,以及一种最新开发的方法--低音-后向法进行了全面的比较研究。我们深入探讨了这些技术,讨论了它们的历史发展、优势和局限性。通过一系列蒙特卡罗模拟,我们评估了这些方法在准确确定适当因子数量方面的功效。具体来说,我们研究了低频后向框架中的两个停止标准:BA-maxLoading 和 BA-cutoff。我们的研究结果为这些方法在不同条件下的表现提供了细致入微的见解,阐明了它们各自的优势和潜在的缺陷。为了提高可访问性,我们创建了一个在线可视化工具,专门针对低频后向方法生成的因子结构。这项研究丰富了人们对因子分析方法的理解,帮助研究人员选择方法,并促进对潜在因子结构的全面解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Fudan Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences
Fudan Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
10.00%
发文量
502
期刊介绍: Fudan Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences (FJHSS) is a peer-reviewed academic journal that publishes research papers across all academic disciplines in the humanities and social sciences. The Journal aims to promote multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary studies, bridge diverse communities of the humanities and social sciences in the world, provide a platform of academic exchange for scholars and readers from all countries and all regions, promote intellectual development in China’s humanities and social sciences, and encourage original, theoretical, and empirical research into new areas, new issues, and new subject matters. Coverage in FJHSS emphasizes the combination of a “local” focus (e.g., a country- or region-specific perspective) with a “global” concern, and engages in the international scholarly dialogue by offering comparative or global analyses and discussions from multidisciplinary or interdisciplinary perspectives. The journal features special topics, special issues, and original articles of general interest in the disciplines of humanities and social sciences. The journal also invites leading scholars as guest editors to organize special issues or special topics devoted to certain important themes, subject matters, and research agendas in the humanities and social sciences.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信