Comparison of Approaches to Constructing Confidence Intervals for Mediating Effects Using Structural Equation Models

Regression mixture models, which have only recently begun to be used in applied research, are a new approach for finding differential effects. This approach comes at the cost of the assumption that error terms are normally distributed within classes. This study uses Monte Carlo simulations to explore the effects of relatively minor violations of this assumption. The use of an ordered polytomous outcome is then examined as an alternative that makes somewhat weaker assumptions, and finally both approaches are demonstrated with an applied example looking at differences in the effects of family management on the highly skewed outcome of drug use. Results show that violating the assumption of normal errors results in systematic bias in both latent class enumeration and parameter estimates. Additional classes that reflect violations of distributional assumptions are found. Under some conditions it is possible to come to conclusions that are consistent with the effects in the population, but when errors are skewed in both classes the results typically no longer reflect even the pattern of effects in the population. The polytomous regression model performs better under all scenarios examined and comes to reasonable results with the highly skewed outcome in the applied example. We recommend that careful evaluation of model sensitivity to distributional assumptions be the norm when conducting regression mixture models.     

Approximate Confidence Interval for Difference in Fit of Structural Equation Models

A method for obtaining an approximate confidence interval for the difference in root mean square error of approximation-a widely used goodness-of-fit measure-of 2 structural equation models is discussed, which is based on an application of the bootstrap methodology. The confidence interval represents a useful tool when studying plausibility of parameter restrictions in nested structural equation models and can be used for examining the difference in fit, accounting for complexity, for any 2 models-whether nested or nonnested-fitted to the same data set. The method is illustrated on a numerical example.     

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.     

Standardized Parameters in Misspecified Structural Equation Models: Empirical Performance in Point Estimates,Standard Errors,and Confidence Intervals

In practice, models always have misfit, and it is not well known in what situations methods that provide point estimates, standard errors (SEs), or confidence intervals (CIs) of standardized structural equation modeling (SEM) parameters are trustworthy. In this article we carried out simulations to evaluate the empirical performance of currently available methods. We studied maximum likelihood point estimates, as well as SE estimators based on the delta method, nonparametric bootstrap (NP-B), and semiparametric bootstrap (SP-B). For CIs we studied Wald CI based on delta, and percentile and BC_a intervals based on NP-B and SP-B. We conducted simulation studies using both confirmatory factor analysis and SEM models. Depending on (a) whether point estimate, SE, or CI is of interest; (b) amount of model misfit; (c) sample size; and (d) model complexity, different methods can be the one that renders best performance. Based on the simulation results, we discuss how to choose proper methods in practice.     

Assessing Fit in Structural Equation Models: A Monte-Carlo Evaluation of RMSEA Versus SRMR Confidence Intervals and Tests of Close Fit

We compare the accuracy of confidence intervals (CIs) and tests of close fit based on the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) with those based on the standardized root mean square residual (SRMR). Investigations used normal and nonnormal data with models ranging from p = 10 to 60 observed variables. CIs and tests of close fit based on the SRMR are generally accurate across all conditions (even at p = 60 with nonnormal data). In contrast, CIs and tests of close fit based on the RMSEA are only accurate in small models. In larger models (p ≥ 30), they incorrectly suggest that models do not fit closely, particularly if sample size is less than 500.     

Testing Complex Correlational Hypotheses With Structural Equation Models

It is often of interest to estimate partial or semipartial correlation coefficients as indexes of the linear association between 2 variables after partialing one or both for the influence of covariates. Squaring these coefficients expresses the proportion of variance in 1 variable explained by the other variable after controlling for covariates. Methods exist for testing hypotheses about the equality of these coefficients across 2 or more groups, but they are difficult to conduct by hand, prone to error, and limited to simple cases. A unified framework is provided for estimating bivariate, partial, and semipartial correlation coefficients using structural equation modeling (SEM). Within the SEM framework, it is straightforward to test hypotheses of the equality of various correlation coefficients with any number of covariates across multiple groups. LISREL syntax is provided, along with 4 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.     

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.     

Modeling of Nonrecursive Structural Equation Models With Categorical Indicators

Nonrecursive structural equation models generally take the form of feedback loops, involving 2 latent variables that are connected by 2 unidirectional paths, 1 starting with each variable and terminating in the other variable. Nonrecursive models belong to a larger class of path models that require the use of instrumental variables (IVs) to achieve model identification. Prior research has focused on SEM parameter estimation with IVs when indicators were continuous and normally distributed. Much less is known about how estimators function in the presence of categorical indicators, which are commonly used in the social sciences, such as with cognitive and affective instruments. In this study, there was specific interest in comparing the 2-stage least squares (2SLS) estimator and its categorical variant to other recommended estimators. This study compares the performance of several estimation approaches for fitting structural equation models with categorical indicator variables when IVs are necessary to obtain proper model estimates. Across conditions, 1 extension of the nonlinear 2SLS (N2SLS) approach, the nonlinear 3-stage least squares (N3SLS), which accounts for correlated errors among regressors within each model (as does the N2SLS), as well as correlations of errors across models, which N2SLS does not, appears to work the best among methods compared.     

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.     

Likelihood-Based Confidence Intervals for a Parameter With an Upper or Lower Bound

The precision of estimates in many statistical models can be expressed by a confidence interval (CI). CIs based on standard errors (SEs) are common in practice, but likelihood-based CIs are worth consideration. In comparison to SEs, likelihood-based CIs are typically more difficult to estimate, but are more robust to model (re)parameterization. In latent variable models, some parameters might take on values outside of their interpretable range. Therefore, it is desirable to place a bound to keep the parameter interpretable. For likelihood-based CI, a correction is needed when a parameter is bounded. The correction is known (Wu & Neale, 2012), but is difficult to implement in practice. A novel automatic implementation that is simple for an applied researcher to use is introduced. A simulation study demonstrates the accuracy of the correction using a latent growth curve model and the method is illustrated with a multilevel confirmatory factor analysis.     

Assessing Structural Equation Models by Equivalence Testing With Adjusted Fit Indexes

Conventional null hypothesis testing (NHT) is a very important tool if the ultimate goal is to find a difference or to reject a model. However, the purpose of structural equation modeling (SEM) is to identify a model and use it to account for the relationship among substantive variables. With the setup of NHT, a nonsignificant test statistic does not necessarily imply that the model is correctly specified or the size of misspecification is properly controlled. To overcome this problem, this article proposes to replace NHT by equivalence testing, the goal of which is to endorse a model under a null hypothesis rather than to reject it. Differences and similarities between equivalence testing and NHT are discussed, and new “T-size” terminology is introduced to convey the goodness of the current model under equivalence testing. Adjusted cutoff values of root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) and comparative fit index (CFI) corresponding to those conventionally used in the literature are obtained to facilitate the understanding of T-size RMSEA and CFI. The single most notable property of equivalence testing is that it allows a researcher to confidently claim that the size of misspecification in the current model is below the T-size RMSEA or CFI, which gives SEM a desirable property to be a scientific methodology. R code for conducting equivalence testing is provided in an appendix.     

Model Selection in Structural Equation Models With Continuous and Polytomous Data

Recently, analysis of structural equation models with polytomous and continuous variables has received a lot of attention. However, contributions to the selection of good models are limited. The main objective of this article is to investigate the maximum likelihood estimation of unknown parameters in a general LISREL-type model with mixed polytomous and continuous data and propose a model selection procedure for obtaining good models for the underlying substantive theory. The maximum likelihood estimate is obtained by a Monte Carlo Expectation Maximization algorithm, in which the E step is evaluated via the Gibbs sampler and the M step is completed via the method of conditional maximization. The convergence of the Monte Carlo Expectation Maximization algorithm is monitored by the bridge sampling. A model selection procedure based on Bayes factor and Occam's window search strategy is proposed. The effectiveness of the procedure in accounting for the model uncertainty and in picking good models is discussed. The proposed methodology is illustrated with a real example.     

A Bayesian Approach for Analyzing Hierarchical Data With Missing Outcomes Through Structural Equation Models

Structural equation models are widely appreciated in behavioral, social, and psychological research to model relations between latent constructs and manifest variables, and to control for measurement errors. Most applications of structural equation models are based on fully observed data that are independently distributed. However, hierarchical data with a correlated structure are common in behavioral research, and very often, missing data are encountered. In this article, we propose a 2-level structural equation model for analyzing hierarchical data with missing entries, and describe a Bayesian approach for estimation and model comparison. We show how to use WinBUGS software to get the solution conveniently. The proposed methodologies are illustrated through a simulation study, and a real application in relation to organizational and management research concerning the study of the interrelationships of the latent constructs about job satisfaction, job responsibility, and life satisfaction for citizens in 43 countries.     

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.     

Two Rules of Identification for Structural Equation Models

Identification of structural equation models remains a challenge to many researchers. Although empirical tests of identification are readily available in structural equation modeling software, these examine local identification and rely on sample estimates of parameters. Rules of identification are available, but do not include all models encountered in practice. In this article we provide 2 rules of identification: the 2+ emitted paths rule and the exogenous X rule. The former is a necessary condition of identification and the latter is a sufficient condition. We explain and prove each of these rules and provide illustrations of their application. These rules extend the coverage of structural equation models that we can check for identification. We also explain how they can be part of a piecewise identification strategy that extends their use even further.     

Bayesian Analysis of Mixture Structural Equation Models With an Unknown Number of Components

Multivariate heterogenous data with latent variables are common in many fields such as biological, medical, behavioral, and social-psychological sciences. Mixture structural equation models are multivariate techniques used to examine heterogeneous interrelationships among latent variables. In the analysis of mixture models, determination of the number of mixture components is always an important and challenging issue. This article aims to develop a full Bayesian approach with the use of reversible jump Markov chain Monte Carlo method to analyze mixture structural equation models with an unknown number of components. The proposed procedure can simultaneously and efficiently select the number of mixture components and conduct parameter estimation. Simulation studies show the satisfactory empirical performance of the method. The proposed method is applied to study risk factors of osteoporotic fractures in older people.     

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.