Automated Selection of Robust Individual-Level Structural Equation Models for Time Series Data

In order to analyze intensive longitudinal data collected across multiple individuals, researchers frequently have to decide between aggregating all individuals or analyzing each individual separately. This paper presents an R package, gimme, which allows for the automatic specification of individual-level structural equation models that combine group-, subgroup-, and individual-level information. This R package is a complement of the GIMME program currently available via a combination of MATLAB and LISREL. By capitalizing on the flexibility of R and the capabilities of the existing structural equation modeling package lavaan, gimme allows for the automated specification and estimation of group-, subgroup-, and individual-level relations in time series data from within a structural equation modeling framework. Applications include daily diary data as well as functional magnetic resonance imaging data.     

Identifying Aberrant Data in Structural Equation Models With IRLS-ADF

In structural equation models, outliers could result in inaccurate parameter estimates and misleading fit statistics when using traditional methods. To robustly estimate structural equation models, iteratively reweighted least squares (IRLS; Yuan & Bentler, 2000) has been proposed, but not thoroughly examined. We explore the large-sample properties of IRLS and its effect on parameter recovery, model fit, and aberrant data identification. A parametric bootstrap technique is proposed to determine the tuning parameters of IRLS, which results in improved Type I error rates in aberrant data identification, for data sets generated from homogenous populations. Scenarios concerning (a) simulated data, (b) contaminated data, and (c) a real data set are studied. Results indicate good parameter recovery, model fit, and aberrant data identification when noisy observations are drawn from a real data set, but lackluster parameter recovery and identification of aberrant data when the noise is parametrically structured. Practical implications and further research are discussed.     

Transformation Structural Equation Models With Highly Nonnormal and Incomplete Data

As useful multivariate techniques, structural equation models have attracted significant attention from various fields. Most existing statistical methods and software for analyzing structural equation models have been developed based on the assumption that the response variables are normally distributed. Several recently developed methods can partially address violations of this assumption, but still encounter difficulties in analyzing highly nonnormal data. Moreover, the presence of missing data is a practical issue in substantive research. Simply ignoring missing data or improperly treating nonignorable missingness as ignorable could seriously distort statistical influence results. The main objective of this article is to develop a Bayesian approach for analyzing transformation structural equation models with highly nonnormal and missing data. Different types of missingness are discussed and selected via the deviance information criterion. The empirical performance of our method is examined via simulation studies. Application to a study concerning people’s job satisfaction, home life, and work attitude is presented.     

Multivariate Meta-Analysis as Structural Equation Models

Multivariate meta-analysis has become increasingly popular in the educational, social, and medical sciences. It is because the outcome measures in a meta-analysis can involve more than one effect size. This article proposes 2 mathematically equivalent models to implement multivariate meta-analysis in structural equation modeling (SEM). Specifically, this article shows how multivariate fixed-, random- and mixed-effects meta-analyses can be formulated as structural equation models. metaSEM (a free R package based on OpenMx) and Mplus are used to implement the proposed procedures. A real data set is used to illustrate the procedures. Formulating multivariate meta-analysis as structural equation models provides many new research opportunities for methodological development in both meta-analysis and SEM. Issues related to and extensions on the SEM-based meta-analysis are discussed.     

The Role of Centering for Interaction of Level 1 Variables in Multilevel Structural Equation Models

This article examined the role of centering in estimating interaction effects in multilevel structural equation models. Interactions are typically represented by product term of 2 variables that are hypothesized to interact. In multilevel structural equation modeling (MSEM), the product term involving Level 1 variables is decomposed into within-cluster and between-cluster random components. The choice of centering affects the decomposition of the product term, and therefore affects the sample variance and covariance associated with the product term used in the maximum likelihood fitting function. The simulation study showed that for an interaction between a Level 1 variable and a Level 2 variable, the product term of uncentered variables or the product term of grand mean centered variables produced unbiased estimates in both Level 1 and Level 2 models. The product term of cluster mean centered variables produced biased estimates in the Level 1 model. For an interaction between 2 Level 1 variables, the product term of cluster mean centered variables produced unbiased estimates in the Level 1 model, whereas the product term of grand mean centered variables produced unbiased estimates for the Level 1 model. Recommendations for researchers who wish to estimate interactions in MSEM are provided.     

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.     

Implementing Restricted Maximum Likelihood Estimation in Structural Equation Models

Structural equation modeling (SEM) is now a generic modeling framework for many multivariate techniques applied in the social and behavioral sciences. Many statistical models can be considered either as special cases of SEM or as part of the latent variable modeling framework. One popular extension is the use of SEM to conduct linear mixed-effects modeling (LMM) such as cross-sectional multilevel modeling and latent growth modeling. It is well known that LMM can be formulated as structural equation models. However, one main difference between the implementations in SEM and LMM is that maximum likelihood (ML) estimation is usually used in SEM, whereas restricted (or residual) maximum likelihood (REML) estimation is the default method in most LMM packages. This article shows how REML estimation can be implemented in SEM. Two empirical examples on latent growth model and meta-analysis are used to illustrate the procedures implemented in OpenMx. Issues related to implementing REML in SEM are discussed.     

Fitting Structural Equation Model Trees and Latent Growth Curve Mixture Models in Longitudinal Designs: The Influence of Model Misspecification

When conducting longitudinal research, the investigation of between-individual differences in patterns of within-individual change can provide important insights. In this article, we use simulation methods to investigate the performance of a model-based exploratory data mining technique—structural equation model trees (SEM trees; Brandmaier, Oertzen, McArdle, & Lindenberger, 2013)—as a tool for detecting population heterogeneity. We use a latent-change score model as a data generation model and manipulate the precision of the information provided by a covariate about the true latent profile as well as other factors, including sample size, under the possible influences of model misspecifications. Simulation results show that, compared with latent growth curve mixture models, SEM trees might be very sensitive to model misspecification in estimating the number of classes. This can be attributed to the lower statistical power in identifying classes, resulting from smaller differences of parameters prescribed by the template model between classes.     

Bayesian Quantile Structural Equation Models

Structural equation modeling is a common multivariate technique for the assessment of the interrelationships among latent variables. Structural equation models have been extensively applied to behavioral, medical, and social sciences. Basic structural equation models consist of a measurement equation for characterizing latent variables through multiple observed variables and a mean regression-type structural equation for investigating how explanatory latent variables influence outcomes of interest. However, the conventional structural equation does not provide a comprehensive analysis of the relationship between latent variables. In this article, we introduce the quantile regression method into structural equation models to assess the conditional quantile of the outcome latent variable given the explanatory latent variables and covariates. The estimation is conducted in a Bayesian framework with Markov Chain Monte Carlo algorithm. The posterior inference is performed with the help of asymmetric Laplace distribution. A simulation shows that the proposed method performs satisfactorily. An application to a study of chronic kidney disease is presented.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Structural Equation Models and Mixture Models With Continuous Nonnormal Skewed Distributions

In this article we describe a structural equation modeling (SEM) framework that allows nonnormal skewed distributions for the continuous observed and latent variables. This framework is based on the multivariate restricted skew t distribution. We demonstrate the advantages of skewed SEM over standard SEM modeling and challenge the notion that structural equation models should be based only on sample means and covariances. The skewed continuous distributions are also very useful in finite mixture modeling as they prevent the formation of spurious classes formed purely to compensate for deviations in the distributions from the standard bell curve distribution. This framework is implemented in Mplus Version 7.2.     

Regularized Structural Equation Modeling

A new method is proposed that extends the use of regularization in both lasso and ridge regression to structural equation models. The method is termed regularized structural equation modeling (RegSEM). RegSEM penalizes specific parameters in structural equation models, with the goal of creating easier to understand and simpler models. Although regularization has gained wide adoption in regression, very little has transferred to models with latent variables. By adding penalties to specific parameters in a structural equation model, researchers have a high level of flexibility in reducing model complexity, overcoming poor fitting models, and the creation of models that are more likely to generalize to new samples. The proposed method was evaluated through a simulation study, two illustrative examples involving a measurement model, and one empirical example involving the structural part of the model to demonstrate RegSEM’s utility.     

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.     

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.     

Model Specification Searches in Structural Equation Modeling with R

This article introduces and demonstrates the application of an R statistical programming environment code for conducting structural equation modeling (SEM) specification searches. The implementation and flexibility of the provided code is demonstrated using the Tabu search procedure, although the underlying code can also be directly modified to implement other search procedures like Ant Colony Optimization, Genetic Algorithms, Ruin-and-Recreate, or Simulated Annealing. The application is illustrated using data with a known common factor structure. The results demonstrate the capabilities of the program for conducting specification searches in SEM. The programming codes are provided as open-source R functions.     

Reporting Monte Carlo Studies in Structural Equation Modeling

In structural equation modeling, Monte Carlo simulations have been used increasingly over the last two decades, as an inventory from the journal Structural Equation Modeling illustrates. Reaching out to a broad audience, this article provides guidelines for reporting Monte Carlo studies in that field. The framework of discourse is set by a number of steps to be taken in such research, matching outlines of experimental design by Paxton, Curran, Bollen, Kirby, and Chen (2001) Chen, F., Bollen, K. A., Paxton, P., Curran, P. J. and Kirby, J. 2001. Improper solutions in structural equation modeling: Causes, consequences, and strategies. Sociological Methods & Research, 29: 468–508. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar] and Skrondal (2000) Skrondal, A. 2000. Design and analysis of Monte Carlo experiments: Attacking the conventional wisdom. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 35: 137–167. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]. Throughout the article, reference is made to exemplary publications and, occasionally, to imperfect reporting.     

A Comparison of Strategies for Forming Product Indicators for Unequal Numbers of Items in Structural Equation Models of Latent Interactions

This Monte Carlo simulation study investigated different strategies for forming product indicators for the unconstrained approach in analyzing latent interaction models when the exogenous factors are measured by unequal numbers of indicators under both normal and nonnormal conditions. Product indicators were created by (a) multiplying parcels of the larger scale by items of the smaller scale, and (b) matching items according to reliability to create several product indicators, ignoring those items with lower reliability. Two scaling approaches were compared where parceling was not involved: (a) fixing the factor variances, and (b) fixing 1 loading to 1 for each factor. The unconstrained approach was compared with the latent moderated structural equations (LMS) approach. Results showed that under normal conditions, the LMS approach was preferred because the biases of its interaction estimates and associated standard errors were generally smaller, and its power was higher than that of the unconstrained approach. Under nonnormal conditions, however, the unconstrained approach was generally more robust than the LMS approach. It is recommended to form product indicators by using items with higher reliability (rather than parceling) in the matching and then to specify the model by fixing 1 loading of each factor to unity when adopting the unconstrained approach.