Evaluation of Test Statistics for Robust Structural Equation Modeling With Nonnormal Missing Data

A 2-stage robust procedure as well as an R package, rsem, were recently developed for structural equation modeling with nonnormal missing data by Yuan and Zhang (2012). Several test statistics that have been used for complete data analysis are employed to evaluate model fit in the 2-stage robust method. However, properties of these statistics under robust procedures for incomplete nonnormal data analysis have never been studied. This study aims to systematically evaluate and compare 5 test statistics, including a test statistic derived from normal-distribution-based maximum likelihood, a rescaled chi-square statistic, an adjusted chi-square statistic, a corrected residual-based asymptotical distribution-free chi-square statistic, and a residual-based F statistic. These statistics are evaluated under a linear growth curve model by varying 8 factors: population distribution, missing data mechanism, missing data rate, sample size, number of measurement occasions, covariance between the latent intercept and slope, variance of measurement errors, and downweighting rate of the 2-stage robust method. The performance of the test statistics varies and the one derived from the 2-stage normal-distribution-based maximum likelihood performs much worse than the other four. Application of the 2-stage robust method and of the test statistics is illustrated through growth curve analysis of mathematical ability development, using data on the Peabody Individual Achievement Test mathematics assessment from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997 Cohort.     

Estimating Standardized SEM Parameters Given Nonnormal Data and Incorrect Model: Methods and Comparison

When both model misspecifications and nonnormal data are present, it is unknown how trustworthy various point estimates, standard errors (SEs), and confidence intervals (CIs) are for standardized structural equation modeling parameters. We conducted simulations to evaluate maximum likelihood (ML), conventional robust SE estimator (MLM), Huber–White robust SE estimator (MLR), and the bootstrap (BS). We found (a) ML point estimates can sometimes be quite biased at finite sample sizes if misfit and nonnormality are serious; (b) ML and MLM generally give egregiously biased SEs and CIs regardless of the degree of misfit and nonnormality; (c) MLR and BS provide trustworthy SEs and CIs given medium misfit and nonnormality, but BS is better; and (d) given severe misfit and nonnormality, MLR tends to break down and BS begins to struggle.     

Multiple-Group Analysis for Structural Equation Modeling With Dependent Samples

Multigroup structural equation modeling (SEM) plays a key role in studying measurement invariance and in group comparison. However, existing methods for multigroup SEM assume that different samples are independent. This article develops a method for multigroup SEM with correlated samples. Parallel to that for independent samples, the focus here is on the cross-group stability of the within-group structure and parameters. In particular, the method does not require the specification of any between-group relationship. Rescaled and adjusted statistics as well as sandwich-type covariance matrices make the developed method work for possibly nonnormal variables with finite 4th-order moments. The method is applied to a longitudinal data set on the development of entrepreneurial teams across 4 phases. Detailed analysis is provided regarding the stability of the effect of psychological compatibility on team performance, as it is mediated by fairness perception and team cohesion.     

Maximum Likelihood Estimation of Structural Equation Models for Continuous Data: Standard Errors and Goodness of Fit

Classical accounts of maximum likelihood (ML) estimation of structural equation models for continuous outcomes involve normality assumptions: standard errors (SEs) are obtained using the expected information matrix and the goodness of fit of the model is tested using the likelihood ratio (LR) statistic. Satorra and Bentler (1994) introduced SEs and mean adjustments or mean and variance adjustments to the LR statistic (involving also the expected information matrix) that are robust to nonnormality. However, in recent years, SEs obtained using the observed information matrix and alternative test statistics have become available. We investigate what choice of SE and test statistic yields better results using an extensive simulation study. We found that robust SEs computed using the expected information matrix coupled with a mean- and variance-adjusted LR test statistic (i.e., MLMV) is the optimal choice, even with normally distributed data, as it yielded the best combination of accurate SEs and Type I errors.     

Structural Equation Modeling Diagnostics Using R Package semdiag and EQS

Yuan and Hayashi (2010) Yuan, K.-H. and Hayashi, K. 2010. Fitting data to model: Structural equation modeling diagnosis using two scatter plots. Psychological Methods, 15: 335–351. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar] introduced 2 scatter plots for model and data diagnostics in structural equation modeling (SEM). However, the generation of the plots requires in-depth understanding of their underlying technical details. This article develops and introduces an R package semdiag for easily drawing the 2 plots. With a model specified in EQS syntax, one only needs to supply as few as 2 parameters to generate the 2 plots using the semdiag package. Two examples are provided to illustrate the use of the package. Multiple figures are used to explain the elements of data and model diagnostics. Advice on selecting proper estimation methods following the diagnostics is also given.     

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.     

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.     

Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling

This article examines the problem of specification error in 2 models for categorical latent variables; the latent class model and the latent Markov model. Specification error in the latent class model focuses on the impact of incorrectly specifying the number of latent classes of the categorical latent variable on measures of model adequacy as well as sample reallocation to latent classes. The results show that the clarity of remaining latent classes, as measured by the entropy statistic depends on the number of observations in the omitted latent class—but this statistic is not reliable. Specification error in the latent Markov model focuses on the transition probabilities when a longitudinal Guttman process is incorrectly specified. The findings show that specifying a longitudinal Guttman process that is not true in the population impacts other transition probabilities through the covariance matrix of the logit parameters used to calculate those probabilities.     

Mean and Mean-and-Variance Corrections With Big Data

Mean and mean-and-variance corrections are the 2 major principles to develop test statistics with violation of conditions. In structural equation modeling (SEM), mean-rescaled and mean-and-variance-adjusted test statistics have been recommended under different contexts. However, recent studies indicated that their Type I error rates vary from 0% to 100% as the number of variables p increases. Can we still trust the 2 principles and what alternative rules can be used to develop test statistics for SEM with “big data”? This article addresses the issues by a large-scale Monte Carlo study. Results indicate that empirical means and standard deviations of each statistic can differ from their expected values many times in standardized units when p is large. Thus, the problems in Type I error control with the 2 statistics are because they do not possess the properties to which they are entitled, not because of the wrongdoing of the mean and mean-and-variance corrections. However, the 2 principles need to be implemented using small sample methodology instead of asymptotics. Results also indicate that distributions other than chi-square might better describe the behavior of test statistics in SEM with big data.     

Structural Equation Modeling With Unknown Population Distributions: Ridge Generalized Least Squares

This article proposes 2 classes of ridge generalized least squares (GLS) procedures for structural equation modeling (SEM) with unknown population distributions. The weight matrix for the first class of ridge GLS is obtained by combining the sample fourth-order moment matrix with the identity matrix. The weight matrix for the second class is obtained by combining the sample fourth-order moment matrix with its diagonal matrix. Empirical results indicate that, with data from an unknown population distribution, parameter estimates by ridge GLS can be much more accurate than those by either GLS or normal-distribution-based maximum likelihood; and standard errors of the parameter estimates also become more accurate in predicting the empirical ones. Rescaled and adjusted statistics are proposed for overall model evaluation, and they also perform much better than the default statistic following from the GLS method. The use of the ridge GLS procedures is illustrated with a real data set.     

Multiplicity Control in Structural Equation Modeling

Abstract

Researchers conducting structural equation modeling analyses rarely, if ever, control for the inflated probability of Type I errors when evaluating the statistical significance of multiple parameters in a model. In this study, the Type I error control, power and true model rates of famsilywise and false discovery rate controlling procedures were compared with rates when no multiplicity control was imposed. The results indicate that Type I error rates become severely inflated with no multiplicity control, but also that familywise error controlling procedures were extremely conservative and had very little power for detecting true relations. False discovery rate controlling procedures provided a compromise between no multiplicity control and strict familywise error control and with large sample sizes provided a high probability of making correct inferences regarding all the parameters in the model.     

Many-Level Multilevel Structural Equation Modeling: An Efficient Evaluation Strategy

Structural equation models are increasingly used for clustered or multilevel data in cases where mixed regression is too inflexible. However, when there are many levels of nesting, these models can become difficult to estimate. We introduce a novel evaluation strategy, Rampart, that applies an orthogonal rotation to the parts of a model that conform to commonly met requirements. This rotation dramatically simplifies fit evaluation in a way that becomes more potent as the size of the data set increases. We validate and evaluate the implementation using a 3-level latent regression simulation study. Then we analyze data from a statewide child behavioral health measure administered by the Oklahoma Department of Human Services. We demonstrate the efficiency of Rampart compared to other similar software using a latent factor model with a 5-level decomposition of latent variance. Rampart is implemented in OpenMx, a free and open source software package.     

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.     

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.     

结构方程与中国农村儿童入学的决定因素

中国农村儿童的入学率和辍学率到底是多少？哪些因素导致儿童辍学？家庭、社区和学生个人等诸方面因素作用辍学的路径是什么？使用2006年中西部地区20个县908名儿童的截面数据,运用SEM方法,考察教育供给、家庭教育支持、儿童在校表现和儿童失学之间的关系。结果发现,教育供给和儿童在校表现显著影响儿童失学,家庭教育支持对儿童失学不存在直接影响。通过儿童在校表现这一中介变量,教育供给和家庭教育支持同时间接作用于儿童失学。     

Alternatives to Multilevel Modeling for the Analysis of Clustered Data

Multilevel modeling has grown in use over the years as a way to deal with the nonindependent nature of observations found in clustered data. However, other alternatives to multilevel modeling are available that can account for observations nested within clusters, including the use of Taylor series linearization for variance estimation, the design effect adjusted standard errors approach, and fixed effects modeling. Using 1,000 replications of 12 conditions with varied Level 1 and Level 2 sample sizes, the author compared parameter estimates, standard errors, and statistical significance using various alternative procedures. Results indicate that several acceptable procedures can be used in lieu of or together with multilevel modeling, depending on the type of research question asked and the number of clusters under investigation. Guidelines for applied researchers are discussed.     

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.     

稳健黑箱模型预测反相液相色谱保留方程系数

提出稳健黑箱模型预测反相液相色谱保留方程系数,结果明显优于多元线性回归方法,并与反向传播算法网络方法进行比较.