Bayesian Data-Model Fit Assessment for Structural Equation Modeling

Bayesian approaches to modeling are receiving an increasing amount of attention in the areas of model construction and estimation in factor analysis, structural equation modeling (SEM), and related latent variable models. However, model diagnostics and model criticism remain relatively understudied aspects of Bayesian SEM. This article describes and illustrates key features of Bayesian approaches to model diagnostics and assessing data–model fit of structural equation models, discussing their merits relative to traditional procedures.     

A Systematic Evaluation and Comparison Between Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling and Bayesian Structural Equation Modeling

In this study, we contrast two competing approaches, not previously compared, that balance the rigor of CFA/SEM with the flexibility to fit realistically complex data. Exploratory SEM (ESEM) is claimed to provide an optimal compromise between EFA and CFA/SEM. Alternatively, a family of three Bayesian SEMs (BSEMs) replace fixed-zero estimates with informative, small-variance priors for different subsets of parameters: cross-loadings (CL), residual covariances (RC), or CLs and RCs (CLRC). In Study 1, using three simulation studies, results showed that (1) BSEM-CL performed more closely to ESEM; (2) BSEM-CLRC did not provide more accurate model estimation compared with BSEM-CL; (3) BSEM-RC provided unstable estimation; and (4) different specifications of targeted values in ESEM and informative priors in BSEM have significant impacts on model estimation. The real data analysis (Study 2) showed that the differences in estimation between different models were largely consistent with those in Study1 but somewhat smaller.     

Bootstrapping Confidence Intervals for Fit Indexes in Structural Equation Modeling

Bootstrapping approximate fit indexes in structural equation modeling (SEM) is of great importance because most fit indexes do not have tractable analytic distributions. Model-based bootstrap, which has been proposed to obtain the distribution of the model chi-square statistic under the null hypothesis (Bollen & Stine, 1992), is not theoretically appropriate for obtaining confidence intervals (CIs) for fit indexes because it assumes the null is exactly true. On the other hand, naive bootstrap is not expected to work well for those fit indexes that are based on the chi-square statistic, such as the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) and the comparative fit index (CFI), because sample noncentrality is a biased estimate of the population noncentrality. In this article we argue that a recently proposed bootstrap approach due to Yuan, Hayashi, and Yanagihara (YHY; 2007) is ideal for bootstrapping fit indexes that are based on the chi-square. This method transforms the data so that the “parent” population has the population noncentrality parameter equal to the estimated noncentrality in the original sample. We conducted a simulation study to evaluate the performance of the YHY bootstrap and the naive bootstrap for 4 indexes: RMSEA, CFI, goodness-of-fit index (GFI), and standardized root mean square residual (SRMR). We found that for RMSEA and CFI, the CIs under the YHY bootstrap had relatively good coverage rates for all conditions, whereas the CIs under the naive bootstrap had very low coverage rates when the fitted model had large degrees of freedom. However, for GFI and SRMR, the CIs under both bootstrap methods had poor coverage rates in most conditions.     

A Bayesian Approach to Multilevel Structural Equation Modeling With Continuous and Dichotomous Outcomes

Multilevel Structural equation models are most often estimated from a frequentist framework via maximum likelihood. However, as shown in this article, frequentist results are not always accurate. Alternatively, one can apply a Bayesian approach using Markov chain Monte Carlo estimation methods. This simulation study compared estimation quality using Bayesian and frequentist approaches in the context of a multilevel latent covariate model. Continuous and dichotomous variables were examined because it is not yet known how different types of outcomes—most notably categorical—affect parameter recovery in this modeling context. Within the Bayesian estimation framework, the impact of diffuse, weakly informative, and informative prior distributions were compared. Findings indicated that Bayesian estimation may be used to overcome convergence problems and improve parameter estimate bias. Results highlight the differences in estimation quality between dichotomous and continuous variable models and the importance of prior distribution choice for cluster-level random effects.     

Bayesian Model Averaging Over Directed Acyclic Graphs With Implications for the Predictive Performance of Structural Equation Models

This article examines Bayesian model averaging as a means of addressing predictive performance in Bayesian structural equation models. The current approach to addressing the problem of model uncertainty lies in the method of Bayesian model averaging. We expand the work of Madigan and his colleagues by considering a structural equation model as a special case of a directed acyclic graph. We then provide an algorithm that searches the model space for submodels and obtains a weighted average of the submodels using posterior model probabilities as weights. Our simulation study provides a frequentist evaluation of our Bayesian model averaging approach and indicates that when the true model is known, Bayesian model averaging does not yield necessarily better predictive performance compared to nonaveraged models. However, our case study using data from an international large-scale assessment reveals that the model-averaged submodels provide better posterior predictive performance compared to the initially specified model.     

Comparison of Frequentist and Bayesian Regularization in Structural Equation Modeling

Research in regularization, as applied to structural equation modeling (SEM), remains in its infancy. Specifically, very little work has compared regularization approaches across both frequentist and Bayesian estimation. The purpose of this study was to address just that, demonstrating both similarity and distinction across estimation frameworks, while specifically highlighting more recent developments in Bayesian regularization. This is accomplished through the use of two empirical examples that demonstrate both ridge and lasso approaches across both frequentist and Bayesian estimation, along with detail regarding software implementation. We conclude with a discussion of future research, advocating for increased evaluation and synthesis across both Bayesian and frequentist frameworks.     

Evaluating Model Fit and Structural Coefficient Bias: A Bayesian Approach to Multilevel Bifactor Model Misspecification

Appropriate model specification is fundamental to unbiased parameter estimates and accurate model interpretations in structural equation modeling. Thus detecting potential model misspecification has drawn the attention of many researchers. This simulation study evaluates the efficacy of the Bayesian approach (the posterior predictive checking, or PPC procedure) under multilevel bifactor model misspecification (i.e., ignoring a specific factor at the within level). The impact of model misspecification on structural coefficients was also examined in terms of bias and power. Results showed that the PPC procedure performed better in detecting multilevel bifactor model misspecification, when the misspecification became more severe and sample size was larger. Structural coefficients were increasingly negatively biased at the within level, as model misspecification became more severe. Model misspecification at the within level affected the between-level structural coefficient estimates more when data dependency was lower and the number of clusters was smaller. Implications for researchers are discussed.     

Using the Standardized Root Mean Squared Residual (SRMR) to Assess Exact Fit in Structural Equation Models

We examine the accuracy of p values obtained using the asymptotic mean and variance (MV) correction to the distribution of the sample standardized root mean squared residual (SRMR) proposed by Maydeu-Olivares to assess the exact fit of SEM models. In a simulation study, we found that under normality, the MV-corrected SRMR statistic provides reasonably accurate Type I errors even in small samples and for large models, clearly outperforming the current standard, that is, the likelihood ratio (LR) test. When data shows excess kurtosis, MV-corrected SRMR p values are only accurate in small models (p = 10), or in medium-sized models (p = 30) if no skewness is present and sample sizes are at least 500. Overall, when data are not normal, the MV-corrected LR test seems to outperform the MV-corrected SRMR. We elaborate on these findings by showing that the asymptotic approximation to the mean of the SRMR sampling distribution is quite accurate, while the asymptotic approximation to the standard deviation is not.     

Introduction to Structural Equation Modeling: Issues and Practical Considerations

Structural equation modeling (SEM) is a versatile statistical modeling tool. Its estimation techniques, modeling capacities, and breadth of applications are expanding rapidly. This module introduces some common terminologies. General steps of SEM are discussed along with important considerations in each step. Simple examples are provided to illustrate some of the ideas for beginners. In addition, several popular specialized SEM software programs are briefly discussed with regard to their features and availability. The intent of this module is to focus on foundational issues to inform readers of the potentials as well as the limitations of SEM. Interested readers are encouraged to consult additional references for advanced model types and more application examples.     

Evaluation of Structural Relationships in Autoregressive Cross-Lagged Models Under Longitudinal Approximate Invariance:A Bayesian Analysis

To infer longitudinal relationships among latent factors, traditional analyses assume that the measurement model is invariant across measurement occasions. Alternative to placing cross-occasion equality constraints on parameters, approximate measurement invariance (MI) can be analyzed by specifying informative priors on parameter differences between occasions. This study evaluated the estimation of structural coefficients in multiple-indicator autoregressive cross-lagged models under various conditions of approximate MI using Bayesian structural equation modeling. Design factors included factor structures, conditions of non-invariance, sizes of structural coefficients, and sample sizes. Models were analyzed using two sets of small-variance priors on select model parameters. Results showed that autoregressive coefficient estimates were more accurate for the mixed pattern than the decreasing pattern of non-invariance. When a model included cross-loadings, an interaction was found between the cross-lagged estimates and the non-invariance conditions. Implications of findings and future research directions are discussed.     

Bayesian Meta-Analytic SEM: A One-Stage Approach to Modeling Between-Studies Heterogeneity in Structural Parameters

Meta-analytic structural equation modeling (MASEM) refers to a set of meta-analysis techniques for combining and comparing structural equation modeling (SEM) results from multiple studies. Existing approaches to MASEM cannot appropriately model between-studies heterogeneity in structural parameters because of missing correlations, lack model fit assessment, and suffer from several theoretical limitations. In this study, we address the major shortcomings of existing approaches by proposing a novel Bayesian multilevel SEM approach. Simulation results showed that the proposed approach performed satisfactorily in terms of parameter estimation and model fit evaluation when the number of studies and the within-study sample size were sufficiently large and when correlations were missing completely at random. An empirical example about the structure of personality based on a subset of data was provided. Results favored the third factor structure over the hierarchical structure. We end the article with discussions and future directions.     

Assessing Model Similarity in Structural Equation Modeling

Two models can be nonequivalent, but fit very similarly across a wide range of data sets. These near-equivalent models, like equivalent models, should be considered rival explanations for results of a study if they represent plausible explanations for the phenomenon of interest. Prior to conducting a study, researchers should evaluate plausible models that are alternatives to those hypothesized to evaluate whether they are near-equivalent or equivalent and, in so doing, address the adequacy of the study’s methodology. To assess the extent to which alternative models for a study are empirically distinguishable, we propose 5 indexes that quantify the degree of similarity in fit between 2 models across a specified universe of data sets. These indexes compare either the maximum likelihood fit function values or the residual covariance matrices of models. Illustrations are provided to support interpretations of these similarity indexes.     

An NCME Instructional Module on Item‐Fit Statistics for Item Response Theory Models

Drawing valid inferences from item response theory (IRT) models is contingent upon a good fit of the data to the model. Violations of model‐data fit have numerous consequences, limiting the usefulness and applicability of the model. This instructional module provides an overview of methods used for evaluating the fit of IRT models. Upon completing this module, the reader will have an understanding of traditional and Bayesian approaches for evaluating model‐data fit of IRT models, the relative advantages of each approach, and the software available to implement each method.     

Multilevel Factorial Invariance in n-Level Structural Equation Modeling (nSEM)

We present a multigroup multilevel confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) model and a procedure for testing multilevel factorial invariance in n-level structural equation modeling (nSEM). Multigroup multilevel CFA introduces a complexity when the group membership at the lower level intersects the clustered structure, because the observations in different groups but in the same cluster are not independent of one another. nSEM provides a framework in which the multigroup multilevel data structure is represented with the dependency between groups at the lower level properly taken into account. The procedure for testing multilevel factorial invariance is illustrated with an empirical example using an R package xxm2.     

Comparing Squared Multiple Correlation Coefficients Using Structural Equation Modeling

In social science research, a common topic in multiple regression analysis is to compare the squared multiple correlation coefficients in different populations. Existing methods based on asymptotic theories (Olkin & Finn, 1995) and bootstrapping (Chan, 2009) are available but these can only handle a 2-group comparison. Another method based on structural equation modeling (SEM) has been proposed recently. However, this method has three disadvantages. First, it requires the user to explicitly specify the sample R² as a function in terms of the basic SEM model parameters, which is sometimes troublesome and error prone. Second, it requires the specification of nonlinear constraints, which is not available in some popular SEM software programs. Third, it is for a 2-group comparison primarily. In this article, a 2-stage SEM method is proposed as an alternative. Unlike all other existing methods, the proposed method is simple to use, and it does not require any specific programming features such as the specification of nonlinear constraints. More important, the method allows a simultaneous comparison of 3 or more groups. A real example is given to illustrate the proposed method using EQS, a popular SEM software program.     

The Ability for Posterior Predictive Checking to Identify Model Misspecification in Bayesian Growth Mixture Modeling

Proper model specification is an issue for researchers, regardless of the estimation framework being utilized. Typically, indexes are used to compare the fit of one model to the fit of an alternate model. These indexes only provide an indication of relative fit and do not necessarily point toward proper model specification. There is a procedure in the Bayesian framework called posterior predictive checking that is designed theoretically to detect model misspecification for observed data. However, the performance of the posterior predictive check procedure has thus far not been directly examined under different conditions of mixture model misspecification. This article addresses this task and aims to provide additional insight into whether or not posterior predictive checks can detect model misspecification within the context of Bayesian growth mixture modeling. Results indicate that this procedure can only identify mixture model misspecification under very extreme cases of misspecification.     

Confidence Intervals of Fit Indexes by Inverting a Bootstrap Test

Fit indexes are an important tool in the evaluation of model fit in structural equation modeling (SEM). Currently, the newest confidence interval (CI) for fit indexes proposed by Zhang and Savalei (2016) is based on the quantiles of a bootstrap sampling distribution at a single level of misspecification. This method, despite a great improvement over naive and model-based bootstrap methods, still suffers from unsatisfactory coverage. In this work, we propose a new method of constructing bootstrap CIs for various fit indexes. This method directly inverts a bootstrap test and produces a CI that involves levels of misspecification that would not be rejected in a bootstrap test. Similar in rationale to a parametric CI of root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) based on a noncentral χ2 distribution and a profile-likelihood CI of model parameters, this approach is shown to have better performance than the approach of Zhang and Savalei (2016), with more accurate coverage and more efficient widths.     

Revisiting the Model Size Effect in Structural Equation Modeling

Fitting a large structural equation modeling (SEM) model with moderate to small sample sizes results in an inflated Type I error rate for the likelihood ratio test statistic under the chi-square reference distribution, known as the model size effect. In this article, we show that the number of observed variables (p) and the number of free parameters (q) have unique effects on the Type I error rate of the likelihood ratio test statistic. In addition, the effects of p and q cannot be fully explained using degrees of freedom (df). We also evaluated the performance of 4 correctional methods for the model size effect, including Bartlett’s (1950), Swain’s (1975), and Yuan’s (2005) corrected statistics, and Yuan, Tian, and Yanagihara’s (2015) empirically corrected statistic. We found that Yuan et al.’s (2015) empirically corrected statistic generally yields the best performance in controlling the Type I error rate when fitting large SEM models.     

A Second-Order Longitudinal Model for Binary Outcomes: Item Response Theory Versus Structural Equation Modeling

Measuring academic growth, or change in aptitude, relies on longitudinal data collected across multiple measurements. The National Educational Longitudinal Study (NELS:88) is among the earliest, large-scale, educational surveys tracking students’ performance on cognitive batteries over 3 years. Notable features of the NELS:88 data set, and of almost all repeated measures educational assessments, are (a) the outcome variables are binary or at least categorical in nature; and (b) a set of different items is given at each measurement occasion with a few anchor items to fix the measurement scale. This study focuses on the challenges related to specifying and fitting a second-order longitudinal model for binary outcomes, within both the item response theory and structural equation modeling frameworks. The distinctions between and commonalities shared between these two frameworks are discussed. A real data analysis using the NELS:88 data set is presented for illustration purposes.     

Comparing Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling and Existing Approaches for Multiple Regression with Latent Variables

Exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM) is an approach for analysis of latent variables using exploratory factor analysis to evaluate the measurement model. This study compared ESEM with two dominant approaches for multiple regression with latent variables, structural equation modeling (SEM) and manifest regression analysis (MRA). Main findings included: (1) ESEM in general provided the least biased estimation of the regression coefficients; SEM was more biased than MRA given large cross-factor loadings. (2) MRA produced the most precise estimation, followed by ESEM and then SEM. (3) SEM was the least powerful in the significance tests; statistical power was lower for ESEM than MRA with relatively small target-factor loadings, but higher for ESEM than MRA with relatively large target-factor loadings. (4) ESEM showed difficulties in convergence and occasionally created an inflated type I error rate under some conditions. ESEM is recommended when non-ignorable cross-factor loadings exist.