IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jedbes/v40y2015i5p477-510.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Multilevel CFA-MTMM Model for Nested Structurally Different Methods

Author

Listed:
  • Tobias Koch

    (Leuphana Universität Lüneburg)

  • Martin Schultze

    (Freie Universität Berlin)

  • Jeremy Burrus

    (Professional Examination Service)

  • Richard D. Roberts

    (Professional Examination Service)

  • Michael Eid

    (Freie Universität Berlin)

Abstract

The numerous advantages of structural equation modeling (SEM) for the analysis of multitrait–multimethod (MTMM) data are well known. MTMM-SEMs allow researchers to explicitly model the measurement error, to examine the true convergent and discriminant validity of the given measures, and to relate external variables to the latent trait as well as the latent method factors in the model. According to Eid et al. (2008) different MTMM measurement designs require different types of MTMM-SEMs. Eid et al. (2008) proposed three different MTMM-SEMs for measurement designs with (a) structurally different methods, (b) interchangeable methods, and (c) a combination of both types of methods. In the present work, we extend this taxonomy to a multilevel correlated traits–correlated methods minus one [CTC(M − 1)] model for nested structurally different methods. The new model enables researchers to study method effects on both measurement levels (i.e., within and between clusters, classes, schools, etc.) and evaluate the convergent and discriminant validity of the measures. The statistical performance of the model is examined by a simulation study, and recommendations for the application of the model are given.

Suggested Citation

  • Tobias Koch & Martin Schultze & Jeremy Burrus & Richard D. Roberts & Michael Eid, 2015. "A Multilevel CFA-MTMM Model for Nested Structurally Different Methods," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 40(5), pages 477-510, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jedbes:v:40:y:2015:i:5:p:477-510
    DOI: 10.3102/1076998615606109
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.3102/1076998615606109
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.3102/1076998615606109?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Steffi Pohl & Rolf Steyer & Katrin Kraus, 2008. "Modelling method effects as individual causal effects," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 171(1), pages 41-63, January.
    2. White, Halbert, 1980. "A Heteroskedasticity-Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator and a Direct Test for Heteroskedasticity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(4), pages 817-838, May.
    3. Albert Satorra & Peter Bentler, 2001. "A scaled difference chi-square test statistic for moment structure analysis," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 66(4), pages 507-514, December.
    4. Michael Eid, 2000. "A multitrait-multimethod model with minimal assumptions," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 65(2), pages 241-261, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Tobias Koch & Martin Schultze & Jana Holtmann & Christian Geiser & Michael Eid, 2017. "A Multimethod Latent State-Trait Model for Structurally Different And Interchangeable Methods," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 82(1), pages 17-47, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Christian Geiser & Michael Eid & Fridtjof Nussbeck & Delphine Courvoisier & David Cole, 2010. "Multitrait-multimethod change modelling," AStA Advances in Statistical Analysis, Springer;German Statistical Society, vol. 94(2), pages 185-201, June.
    2. Chester Chun Seng Kam, 2018. "Why Do We Still Have an Impoverished Understanding of the Item Wording Effect? An Empirical Examination," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 47(3), pages 574-597, August.
    3. Jens Jirschitzka & Aileen Oeberst & Richard Göllner & Ulrike Cress, 2017. "Inter-rater reliability and validity of peer reviews in an interdisciplinary field," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(2), pages 1059-1092, November.
    4. Tobias Koch & Martin Schultze & Jana Holtmann & Christian Geiser & Michael Eid, 2017. "A Multimethod Latent State-Trait Model for Structurally Different And Interchangeable Methods," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 82(1), pages 17-47, March.
    5. Rolf Steyer & Erik Sengewald & Sonja Hahn, 2015. "Some Comments on Wu and Browne," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 80(3), pages 608-610, September.
    6. Dominik Schreyer, 2019. "Football spectator no-show behaviour in the German Bundesliga," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(45), pages 4882-4901, September.
    7. S. Arunachalam & Sridhar N. Ramaswami & Pol Herrmann & Doug Walker, 2018. "Innovation pathway to profitability: the role of entrepreneurial orientation and marketing capabilities," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 46(4), pages 744-766, July.
    8. Timothy Erickson & Toni M. Whited, 2000. "Measurement Error and the Relationship between Investment and q," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 108(5), pages 1027-1057, October.
    9. Paul W. Miller & Barry R. Chiswick, 2002. "Immigrant earnings: Language skills, linguistic concentrations and the business cycle," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 15(1), pages 31-57.
    10. Fors, Gunnar & Zejan, Mario, 1996. "Overseas R&D by Multinationals in foreign Centers of Excellence," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Economics and Finance 111, Stockholm School of Economics.
    11. Rodrigo M. S. Moita & Claudio Paiva, 2013. "Political Price Cycles in Regulated Industries: Theory and Evidence," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 94-121, February.
    12. Evens Salies & Catherine Waddams, 2003. "Pricing structure in the deregulated UK electricity market," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-03592457, HAL.
    13. Butler, Marty & Leone, Andrew J. & Willenborg, Michael, 2004. "An empirical analysis of auditor reporting and its association with abnormal accruals," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 139-165, June.
    14. Baiyegunhi, L.J.S. & Oppong, B.B., 2016. "Commercialisation of mopane worm (Imbrasia belina) in rural households in Limpopo Province, South Africa," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 141-148.
    15. MacKinnon, J G, 1989. "Heteroskedasticity-Robust Tests for Structural Change," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 77-92.
    16. Fenech, Jean-Pierre & Skully, Michael & Xuguang, Han, 2014. "Franking credits and market reactions: Evidence from the Australian convertible security market," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 1-19.
    17. François Desmoulins-Lebeault & Jean-François Gajewski & Luc Meunier, 2018. "Personality and Risk Aversion," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 38(1), pages 472-489.
    18. Benjamin M. Blau & Ryan J. Whitby, 2014. "Speculative Trading In Reits," Journal of Financial Research, Southern Finance Association;Southwestern Finance Association, vol. 37(1), pages 55-74, February.
    19. Bliss, Mark A. & Gul, Ferdinand A., 2012. "Political connection and leverage: Some Malaysian evidence," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 2344-2350.
    20. Gu, Chen & Kurov, Alexander & Wolfe, Marketa Halova, 2018. "Relief Rallies after FOMC Announcements as a Resolution of Uncertainty," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 1-18.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:jedbes:v:40:y:2015:i:5:p:477-510. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.