IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/psycho/v88y2023i2d10.1007_s11336-023-09909-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Advantages of Using Unweighted Approximation Error Measures for Model Fit Assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Dirk Lubbe

    (Brandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane)

Abstract

Fit indices are highly frequently used for assessing the goodness of fit of latent variable models. Most prominent fit indices, such as the root-mean-square error of approximation (RMSEA) or the comparative fit index (CFI), are based on a noncentrality parameter estimate derived from the model fit statistic. While a noncentrality parameter estimate is well suited for quantifying the amount of systematic error, the complex weighting function involved in its calculation makes indices derived from it challenging to interpret. Moreover, noncentrality-parameter-based fit indices yield systematically different values, depending on the indicators’ level of measurement. For instance, RMSEA and CFI yield more favorable fit indices for models with categorical as compared to metric variables under otherwise identical conditions. In the present article, approaches for obtaining an approximation discrepancy estimate that is independent from any specific weighting function are considered. From these unweighted approximation error estimates, fit indices analogous to RMSEA and CFI are calculated and their finite sample properties are investigated using simulation studies. The results illustrate that the new fit indices consistently estimate their true value which, in contrast to other fit indices, is the same value for metric and categorical variables. Advantages with respect to interpretability are discussed and cutoff criteria for the new indices are considered.

Suggested Citation

  • Dirk Lubbe, 2023. "Advantages of Using Unweighted Approximation Error Measures for Model Fit Assessment," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 88(2), pages 413-433, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:psycho:v:88:y:2023:i:2:d:10.1007_s11336-023-09909-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s11336-023-09909-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11336-023-09909-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11336-023-09909-6?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James Steiger & Alexander Shapiro & Michael Browne, 1985. "On the multivariate asymptotic distribution of sequential Chi-square statistics," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 50(3), pages 253-263, September.
    2. Alberto Maydeu-Olivares, 2017. "Assessing the Size of Model Misfit in Structural Equation Models," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 82(3), pages 533-558, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Fetene B. Tekle & Dereje W. Gudicha & Jeroen K. Vermunt, 2016. "Power analysis for the bootstrap likelihood ratio test for the number of classes in latent class models," Advances in Data Analysis and Classification, Springer;German Classification Society - Gesellschaft für Klassifikation (GfKl);Japanese Classification Society (JCS);Classification and Data Analysis Group of the Italian Statistical Society (CLADAG);International Federation of Classification Societies (IFCS), vol. 10(2), pages 209-224, June.
    2. Zi Jia Ng & Eugene Scott Huebner & Alberto Maydeu-Olivares & Kimberly Joy Hills, 2018. "Confirmatory Factor Analytic Structure and Measurement Invariance of the Brief Multidimensional Students’ Life Satisfaction Scale (BMSLSS) in a Longitudinal Sample of Adolescents," Child Indicators Research, Springer;The International Society of Child Indicators (ISCI), vol. 11(4), pages 1237-1247, August.
    3. Luengo, María Jesús & Obeso, María, 2013. "Efeito da hélice tríplice em desempenho de inovação," RAE - Revista de Administração de Empresas, FGV-EAESP Escola de Administração de Empresas de São Paulo (Brazil), vol. 53(4), July.
    4. Jinshu Cui & Heather Rosoff & Richard S. John, 2018. "Public Response to a Near‐Miss Nuclear Accident Scenario Varying in Causal Attributions and Outcome Uncertainty," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(5), pages 947-961, May.
    5. Hugo Horta & João M. Santos, 2016. "An instrument to measure individuals’ research agenda setting: the multi-dimensional research agendas inventory," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(3), pages 1243-1265, September.
    6. Ke-Hai Yuan & Peter Bentler, 2006. "Mean Comparison: Manifest Variable Versus Latent Variable," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 71(1), pages 139-159, March.
    7. Albert Satorra, 1989. "Alternative test criteria in covariance structure analysis: A unified approach," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 54(1), pages 131-151, March.
    8. Ingo Balderjahn, 1988. "A note to Bollen's alternative fit measure," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 53(2), pages 283-285, June.
    9. Jan-Benedict E. M. Steenkamp & Alberto Maydeu-Olivares, 2023. "Unrestricted factor analysis: A powerful alternative to confirmatory factor analysis," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 51(1), pages 86-113, January.
    10. Claudia Klüppelberg & Gabriel Kuhn, 2009. "Copula structure analysis," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 71(3), pages 737-753, June.
    11. Sandip Sinharay & Peter W. van Rijn, 2020. "Assessing Fit of the Lognormal Model for Response Times," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 45(5), pages 534-568, October.
    12. P. M. Bentler & Chih-Ping Chou, 1990. "Model Search With TETRAD II and EQS," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 19(1), pages 67-79, August.
    13. Kroh, Martin, 2007. "Measuring Left-Right Political Orientation: The Choice of Response Format," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 71(2), pages 204-220.
    14. Yang Liu & Weimeng Wang, 2022. "Semiparametric Factor Analysis for Item-Level Response Time Data," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 87(2), pages 666-692, June.
    15. J. M. Santos & H. Horta & H. Luna, 2022. "The relationship between academics’ strategic research agendas and their preferences for basic research, applied research, or experimental development," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(7), pages 4191-4225, July.
    16. Martin Kroh, 2006. "An Experimental Evaluation of Popular Well-Being Measures," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 546, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    17. Klein, Andreas & Sharma, Varinder M., 2022. "Consumer decision-making styles, involvement, and the intention to participate in online group buying," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    18. Scholderer, Joachim & Grunert, Klaus G., 2005. "Consumers, food and convenience: The long way from resource constraints to actual consumption patterns," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 105-128, February.
    19. Sanghee Lee & Jaeeun Jung & Sungeun Baek & Songyi Lee, 2022. "The Relationship between Career Decision-Making Self-Efficacy, Career Preparation Behaviour and Career Decision Difficulties among South Korean College Students," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-16, November.
    20. Michael W. Browne & Robert Cudeck, 1992. "Alternative Ways of Assessing Model Fit," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 21(2), pages 230-258, November.

    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:spr:psycho:v:88:y:2023:i:2:d:10.1007_s11336-023-09909-6. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.