结构方程建模(SEM)结构事后测量(SAM)方法中非迭代估计量的评价

IF 2.5 2区 心理学 Q2 MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS
Sara Dhaene, Yves Rosseel
{"title":"结构方程建模(SEM)结构事后测量(SAM)方法中非迭代估计量的评价","authors":"Sara Dhaene, Yves Rosseel","doi":"10.1080/10705511.2023.2220135","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><b>Abstract</b></p><p>In Structural Equation Modeling (SEM), the measurement part and the structural part are typically estimated simultaneously via an iterative Maximum Likelihood (ML) procedure. In this study, we compare performance of the standard procedure to the Structural After Measurement (SAM) approach, where the structural part is separated from the measurement part. One appealing feature of the latter multi-step procedure is that it extends the scope of possible estimators, as now also non-iterative methods from factor-analytic literature can be used to estimate the measurement models. In our simulations, the SAM approach outperformed vanilla SEM in small to moderate samples (i.e., no convergence issues, no inadmissible solutions, smaller MSE values). Notably, this held regardless of the estimator used for the measurement part, with negligible differences between iterative and non-iterative estimators. This may call into question the added value of advanced iterative algorithms over closed-form expressions (which generally require less computational time and resources).</p>","PeriodicalId":21964,"journal":{"name":"Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal","volume":"23 18","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An Evaluation of Non-Iterative Estimators in the Structural after Measurement (SAM) Approach to Structural Equation Modeling (SEM)\",\"authors\":\"Sara Dhaene, Yves Rosseel\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10705511.2023.2220135\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><b>Abstract</b></p><p>In Structural Equation Modeling (SEM), the measurement part and the structural part are typically estimated simultaneously via an iterative Maximum Likelihood (ML) procedure. In this study, we compare performance of the standard procedure to the Structural After Measurement (SAM) approach, where the structural part is separated from the measurement part. One appealing feature of the latter multi-step procedure is that it extends the scope of possible estimators, as now also non-iterative methods from factor-analytic literature can be used to estimate the measurement models. In our simulations, the SAM approach outperformed vanilla SEM in small to moderate samples (i.e., no convergence issues, no inadmissible solutions, smaller MSE values). Notably, this held regardless of the estimator used for the measurement part, with negligible differences between iterative and non-iterative estimators. This may call into question the added value of advanced iterative algorithms over closed-form expressions (which generally require less computational time and resources).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21964,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal\",\"volume\":\"23 18\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2023.2220135\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2023.2220135","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要在结构方程建模(SEM)中,通常通过迭代极大似然(ML)过程同时估计测量部分和结构部分。在本研究中,我们将标准程序的性能与结构后测量(SAM)方法进行了比较,其中结构部分与测量部分分离。后一个多步骤过程的一个吸引人的特点是它扩展了可能的估计器的范围,因为现在也可以使用因子分析文献中的非迭代方法来估计测量模型。在我们的模拟中,SAM方法在小样本到中等样本(即,没有收敛问题,没有不可接受的解,更小的MSE值)中优于普通SEM。值得注意的是,不管用于度量部分的估计器是什么,迭代估计器和非迭代估计器之间的差异可以忽略不计。这可能会让人质疑高级迭代算法相对于封闭形式表达式(通常需要较少的计算时间和资源)的附加价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
An Evaluation of Non-Iterative Estimators in the Structural after Measurement (SAM) Approach to Structural Equation Modeling (SEM)

Abstract

In Structural Equation Modeling (SEM), the measurement part and the structural part are typically estimated simultaneously via an iterative Maximum Likelihood (ML) procedure. In this study, we compare performance of the standard procedure to the Structural After Measurement (SAM) approach, where the structural part is separated from the measurement part. One appealing feature of the latter multi-step procedure is that it extends the scope of possible estimators, as now also non-iterative methods from factor-analytic literature can be used to estimate the measurement models. In our simulations, the SAM approach outperformed vanilla SEM in small to moderate samples (i.e., no convergence issues, no inadmissible solutions, smaller MSE values). Notably, this held regardless of the estimator used for the measurement part, with negligible differences between iterative and non-iterative estimators. This may call into question the added value of advanced iterative algorithms over closed-form expressions (which generally require less computational time and resources).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.70
自引率
11.70%
发文量
71
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal publishes refereed scholarly work from all academic disciplines interested in structural equation modeling. These disciplines include, but are not limited to, psychology, medicine, sociology, education, political science, economics, management, and business/marketing. Theoretical articles address new developments; applied articles deal with innovative structural equation modeling applications; the Teacher’s Corner provides instructional modules on aspects of structural equation modeling; book and software reviews examine new modeling information and techniques; and advertising alerts readers to new products. Comments on technical or substantive issues addressed in articles or reviews published in the journal are encouraged; comments are reviewed, and authors of the original works are invited to respond.
×
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