在探索性因素分析中,无效的偏斜反应导致无效的因素解决方案:一种使用真实数据的验证方法

M. Bujang, Puzziawati Ab Ghani, S. A. Soelar, N. Zulkifli, Evi Diana Omar
{"title":"在探索性因素分析中,无效的偏斜反应导致无效的因素解决方案:一种使用真实数据的验证方法","authors":"M. Bujang, Puzziawati Ab Ghani, S. A. Soelar, N. Zulkifli, Evi Diana Omar","doi":"10.5455/jbh.20190628084939","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: This study aimed to investigate the potential contribution of invalid skewed responses to invalid factor solution in the result from exploratory factor analysis. In the present study, ‘the invalid skewed response’ is defined as when majority of respondents consistently rate only at one side which will eventually change the real or valid pattern of overall responses. Methods: A validation approach was conducted using a secondary data from a questionnaire validation study of an eight Likert scale, that has a very stable and strong factor solution. Eight sub samples were retrieved from the data to represent multiple sets of analyses with sample size based on rule of thumbs from 3:1 until 10:1. From each sub sample, proportion of dummy response for the extreme left (scale of 0), the middle scale (scale of 4) and the extreme right (scale of 7) were assigned randomly at 10%, 20% and 30% respectively. Results: The invalid consistent responses of a middle scale have very low impact towards the factor solution. The occurrence of the invalid skewed responses affected the factor solution. Majority of the factor solutions were still valid based on consistent responses with 10.0% only. However, the construct that was based on forcing into 4-factor solution had helped to produce the valid factor solution though some resulted in cross-loadings. All Cronbach’s alphas and minimum corrected item to total correlation were relatively strong for all factor solutions although some of the solutions were invalid. Conclusions: The skewed responses have the potential to change the ideal factor solution. Therefore, necessary steps need to be taken to avoid invalid skewed responses especially in self-administered survey. Therefore, the recommended sample size guideline for EFA with justifications is proposed.","PeriodicalId":90204,"journal":{"name":"Journal of behavioral health","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Invalid Skewed Responses Contributes to Invalid Factor Solution in Exploratory Factor Analysis: A Validation Approach Using Real-Life Data\",\"authors\":\"M. Bujang, Puzziawati Ab Ghani, S. A. Soelar, N. Zulkifli, Evi Diana Omar\",\"doi\":\"10.5455/jbh.20190628084939\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: This study aimed to investigate the potential contribution of invalid skewed responses to invalid factor solution in the result from exploratory factor analysis. In the present study, ‘the invalid skewed response’ is defined as when majority of respondents consistently rate only at one side which will eventually change the real or valid pattern of overall responses. Methods: A validation approach was conducted using a secondary data from a questionnaire validation study of an eight Likert scale, that has a very stable and strong factor solution. Eight sub samples were retrieved from the data to represent multiple sets of analyses with sample size based on rule of thumbs from 3:1 until 10:1. From each sub sample, proportion of dummy response for the extreme left (scale of 0), the middle scale (scale of 4) and the extreme right (scale of 7) were assigned randomly at 10%, 20% and 30% respectively. Results: The invalid consistent responses of a middle scale have very low impact towards the factor solution. The occurrence of the invalid skewed responses affected the factor solution. Majority of the factor solutions were still valid based on consistent responses with 10.0% only. However, the construct that was based on forcing into 4-factor solution had helped to produce the valid factor solution though some resulted in cross-loadings. All Cronbach’s alphas and minimum corrected item to total correlation were relatively strong for all factor solutions although some of the solutions were invalid. Conclusions: The skewed responses have the potential to change the ideal factor solution. Therefore, necessary steps need to be taken to avoid invalid skewed responses especially in self-administered survey. Therefore, the recommended sample size guideline for EFA with justifications is proposed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":90204,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of behavioral health\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of behavioral health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5455/jbh.20190628084939\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of behavioral health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5455/jbh.20190628084939","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

背景:本研究旨在探讨探索性因子分析结果中无效偏倚反应对无效因子解的潜在贡献。在目前的研究中,“无效倾斜response”被定义为当大多数受访者始终只在一边评分时,这将最终改变整体反应的真实或有效模式。方法:采用8李克特量表问卷验证研究的二次数据进行验证,该量表具有非常稳定和强的因子解。从数据中检索了八个子样本,以表示基于经验法则的样本大小从3:1到10:1的多组分析。在每个子样本中,最左(0分)、中(4分)和最右(7分)的虚拟响应比例分别随机分配为10%、20%和30%。结果:中量表的无效一致性回答对因子解的影响很小。无效偏态响应的出现影响了因子解。大多数因素解决方案仍然有效,只有10.0%的一致反应。然而,基于强制进入4因素解决方案的构造有助于产生有效的因素解决方案,尽管有些会导致交叉加载。所有CronbachÂ的alpha和最小修正项与总相关性对于所有因子解决方案都相对较强,尽管有些解决方案无效。结论:偏斜反应有可能改变理想因子解决方案。因此,需要采取必要的措施,以避免无效的偏斜反应,特别是在自我管理的调查中。因此,建议的全民教育样本量指南和理由被提出。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Invalid Skewed Responses Contributes to Invalid Factor Solution in Exploratory Factor Analysis: A Validation Approach Using Real-Life Data
Background: This study aimed to investigate the potential contribution of invalid skewed responses to invalid factor solution in the result from exploratory factor analysis. In the present study, ‘the invalid skewed response’ is defined as when majority of respondents consistently rate only at one side which will eventually change the real or valid pattern of overall responses. Methods: A validation approach was conducted using a secondary data from a questionnaire validation study of an eight Likert scale, that has a very stable and strong factor solution. Eight sub samples were retrieved from the data to represent multiple sets of analyses with sample size based on rule of thumbs from 3:1 until 10:1. From each sub sample, proportion of dummy response for the extreme left (scale of 0), the middle scale (scale of 4) and the extreme right (scale of 7) were assigned randomly at 10%, 20% and 30% respectively. Results: The invalid consistent responses of a middle scale have very low impact towards the factor solution. The occurrence of the invalid skewed responses affected the factor solution. Majority of the factor solutions were still valid based on consistent responses with 10.0% only. However, the construct that was based on forcing into 4-factor solution had helped to produce the valid factor solution though some resulted in cross-loadings. All Cronbach’s alphas and minimum corrected item to total correlation were relatively strong for all factor solutions although some of the solutions were invalid. Conclusions: The skewed responses have the potential to change the ideal factor solution. Therefore, necessary steps need to be taken to avoid invalid skewed responses especially in self-administered survey. Therefore, the recommended sample size guideline for EFA with justifications is proposed.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信