Dimensionality in confirmatory factor analysis is not in the eye of the beholder: Ancillary bifactor statistical indices illuminate dimensionality and reliability.
{"title":"Dimensionality in confirmatory factor analysis is not in the eye of the beholder: Ancillary bifactor statistical indices illuminate dimensionality and reliability.","authors":"Tyrone B Pretorius, Anita Padmanabhanunni","doi":"10.1002/ijop.13266","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This tutorial delves into dimensionality assessment within the context of psychological measurement instruments, particularly focusing on bifactor models. It underscores the imperative to move beyond traditional fit indices when evaluating factor structures while highlighting the significance of ancillary bifactor indices such as explained common variance, OmegaH and percentage of uncontaminated correlations in gaining a more comprehensive understanding of the interplay between general and specific group factors. The tutorial offers a step-by-step guide to leveraging the power of R software for confirmatory factor analysis and the acquisition of ancillary bifactor indices. Through practical case studies, it elucidates the potential pitfalls of exclusively relying on fit indices and advocates for a balanced, multifaceted approach to dimensionality assessment. By integrating fit measures and ancillary indices, researchers can draw more informed and nuanced conclusions about measurement instrument dimensionality, ultimately enhancing the precision of psychological assessment.</p>","PeriodicalId":48146,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Psychology","volume":" ","pages":"e13266"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.13266","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This tutorial delves into dimensionality assessment within the context of psychological measurement instruments, particularly focusing on bifactor models. It underscores the imperative to move beyond traditional fit indices when evaluating factor structures while highlighting the significance of ancillary bifactor indices such as explained common variance, OmegaH and percentage of uncontaminated correlations in gaining a more comprehensive understanding of the interplay between general and specific group factors. The tutorial offers a step-by-step guide to leveraging the power of R software for confirmatory factor analysis and the acquisition of ancillary bifactor indices. Through practical case studies, it elucidates the potential pitfalls of exclusively relying on fit indices and advocates for a balanced, multifaceted approach to dimensionality assessment. By integrating fit measures and ancillary indices, researchers can draw more informed and nuanced conclusions about measurement instrument dimensionality, ultimately enhancing the precision of psychological assessment.
本教程深入探讨了心理测量工具中的维度评估,尤其侧重于双因素模型。它强调了在评估因子结构时超越传统拟合指数的必要性,同时强调了辅助性双因子指数(如解释的共同方差、OmegaH 和未污染相关百分比)对于更全面地了解一般因子和特定群体因子之间的相互作用的重要意义。本教程逐步指导如何利用 R 软件的强大功能进行确证因子分析和获取辅助双因子指数。通过实际案例研究,它阐明了完全依赖拟合指数的潜在隐患,并提倡采用均衡、多元的方法进行维度评估。通过整合拟合度测量和辅助指数,研究人员可以对测量工具的维度得出更明智、更细致的结论,最终提高心理评估的精确度。
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Psychology (IJP) is the journal of the International Union of Psychological Science (IUPsyS) and is published under the auspices of the Union. IJP seeks to support the IUPsyS in fostering the development of international psychological science. It aims to strengthen the dialog within psychology around the world and to facilitate communication among different areas of psychology and among psychologists from different cultural backgrounds. IJP is the outlet for empirical basic and applied studies and for reviews that either (a) incorporate perspectives from different areas or domains within psychology or across different disciplines, (b) test the culture-dependent validity of psychological theories, or (c) integrate literature from different regions in the world.