The factor structure of Union Commitment: An application of confirmatory factor analysis.

M. E. Gordon et al. (see record 1980-33572-001) developed a Union Commitment scale and identified four underlying factors. L. Friedman and R. J. Harvey (see record 1986-28952-001), in a reanalysis of the Gordon et al. data, concluded that union commitment was best represented by two factors. Although several investigations have replicated the Gordon et al. factor structure, none of these have used confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). In the present study we used CFA to test the explanatory power of the two a priori factor structures. A sample of 465 blue-collar workers working for a large utility company in the midwestern United States participated in this investigation. The results suggest that, first, a modified version of Gordon et al.'s four-factor solution provides a better representation of the factor structure of union commitment. Second, the use of either the four-factor solution or commitment as a unidimensional construct may be justified, depending on the research focus. Finally, we found that unit weighting of the union commitment items was the most appropriate strategy for generating composites. The implication of these results and suggestions for future research are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Commentary on Keith and Witta's hierarchical and cross-age confirmatory factor analysis of the WISC-III.

Comments on T. Z. Keith and E. L. Witta's (1997) analysis of what is measured by the 3rd edition of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC-III) by noting that a general factor comes through as a valid and replicable source of variance in every one of the analyses and that the statistical manipulations using the LISREL program were well chosen. J. B. Carroll also endorses Keith and Witta's contention that the WISC-III contains a factor that approaches being a quantitative reasoning factor. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Reporting practices in confirmatory factor analysis: An overview and some recommendations.

Reporting practices in 194 confirmatory factor analysis studies (1,409 factor models) published in American Psychological Association journals from 1998 to 2006 were reviewed and compared with established reporting guidelines. Three research questions were addressed: (a) how do actual reporting practices compare with published guidelines? (b) how do researchers report model fit in light of divergent perspectives on the use of ancillary fit indices (e.g., L.-T. Hu & P. M. Bentler, 1999; H. W. Marsh, K.-T., Hau, & Z. Wen, 2004)? and (c) are fit measures that support hypothesized models reported more often than fit measures that are less favorable? Results indicate some positive findings with respect to reporting practices including proposing multiple models a priori and near universal reporting of the chi-square significance test. However, many deficiencies were found such as lack of information regarding missing data and assessment of normality. Additionally, the authors found increases in reported values of some incremental fit statistics and no statistically significant evidence that researchers selectively report measures of fit that support their preferred model. Recommendations for reporting are summarized and a checklist is provided to help editors, reviewers, and authors improve reporting practices. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Multitrait-multisource confirmatory factor analytic approach to the construct validity of ADHD rating scales.

Confirmatory factor analysis was used to model a multitrait-multisource design to evaluate the construct validity of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) rating scales. The 2 trait factors were the ADHD inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity dimensions. The 2 source factors were parents and teachers. In Study 1, parents and teachers rated 1,475 Australian elementary school children on the ADHD symptoms. In Study 2, parents and teachers rated 285 Brazilian elementary school children on the ADHD symptoms. Similar results occurred in both studies with most of the ADHD symptoms containing more source than trait variance, thus providing weak evidence for the convergent and discriminant validity of the symptoms as measured by rating scales. The study outlines the implications of such strong source effects for understanding ADHD. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

A confirmatory maximum likelihood factor analysis of the WAIS-R.

A simultaneous maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analysis of intercorrelations among the 11 subtests of the WAIS–R was undertaken in the 9 age groups in the normative sample (D. Wechsler, 1981). Several models were fit to the data and compared, including a single-factor model; orthogonal and oblique 2-factor models, comprised of the Verbal and Performance subtests, respectively; an orthogonal and 2 oblique 3-factor models, the 3rd factor involving the Digit Span, Arithmetic, and Digit Symbol subtests; a 3-factor model, composed of a general intellectual factor and Verbal and Performance factors; and a 4-factor model, consisting of both a general factor and 3 common ability factors (Verbal Comprehension, Perceptual Organization, and Memory/Freedom from Distractability). Results suggest that (a) the single-factor model fits the data fairly well, although there is some misspecification in this model; (b) none of the multifactor models fit the data markedly better than the single-factor model; and (c) the single-factor structure is consistent across the age groups. It is concluded that the WAIS–R largely contains a general intellectual factor and that any common ability factors therein play a minor role in influencing WAIS–R subscale scores. (23 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Analysis of the multitrait-multimethod matrix by confirmatory factor analysis.

The multitrait–multimethod (MTMM) matrix permits examination of the convergent and discriminant validity of psychological measures. Estimation using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), the predominant analytical technique, has often resulted in severe difficulties, such as out-of-range estimates and convergence problems. This article shows that an important special case of one of the more frequently advocated CFA models is not identified and is therefore not estimable. Because most MTMM data are likely to conform closely to this special case, resulting analyses suffer from empirical underidentification. Alternative CFA models are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Structures of psychological distress: Testing confirmatory hierarchical models.

Tested the contention of C. T. Veit and J. E. Ware (see record 1984-02935-001) that the structure of the Mental Health Inventory (MHI) proposed by B. P. Dohrenwend et al (see record 1981-25946-001) is underlaid with the factors of Psychological Distress and Psychological Well-Being. Data from intercorrelations of 5 MHI scales from 5,089 Ss were used. Results show that the theoretical formulation of the MHI is consistent with the data. (9 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Adherence in childhood diabetes: Results of a confirmatory factor analysis.

Tested the equality of the factor pattern of adherence to treatment of childhood diabetes identified by S. B. Johnson et al (see record 1988-05437-001) across 2 independent samples. Samples of 162 and 157 diabetics (aged 6–18 yrs) were studied. Factors 1–4, Exercise, Injection, Diet Type, and Eating/Testing Frequency, were confirmed. Factor 5, Diet Amount, proved to be too complex; the adherence measures comprising this factor (total calories and concentrated sweets consumed) are best treated as separate, single-indicator constructs. Results support a multivariate concept of adherence, offer insight into the nature of the components underlying diabetes adherence, and provide measurement information for reliable component estimation. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Refining the construct of psychopathy: Towards a hierarchical model.

Psychopathy is characterized by diverse indicators. Clinical accounts have emphasized 3 distinct facets: interpersonal, affective, and behavioral. Research using the Psychopathy Checklist–Revised (PCL–R), however, has emphasized a 2-factor model. A review of the literature on the PCL–R and related measures of psychopathy, together with confirmatory factor analysis of PCL–R data from North American participants, indicates that the 2-factor model cannot be sustained. A 3-factor hierarchical model was developed in which a coherent superordinate factor, Psychopathy, is underpinned by 3 factors: Arrogant and Deceitful Interpersonal Style, Deficient Affective Experience, and Impulsive and Irresponsible Behavioral Style. The model was cross-validated on North American and Scottish PCL–R data, Psychopathy Screening Version data, and data derived from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed.; American Psychiatric Association, 1994) antisocial personality disorder field trial. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Utility of confirmatory factor analysis in test validation research.

The multitrait–multimethod ({mtmm}) design is often used in test validation research to disentangle problems due to shared method variance. However, {mtmm} research requires extensive data collection that may be prohibitive in clinical settings. Furthermore, interpretation of {mtmm} data can be ambiguous and misleading. In the current article, maximum-likelihood confirmatory factor analysis ({cfa}) is presented as a means for less ambiguous interpretation of complete and incomplete {mtmm} designs. Confirmatory Factor analysis is applied to four data sets that represent four designs: monotrait–monomethod, multitrait–monomethod, monotrait–multimethod, and multitrait–multimethod. In all four cases, {cfa} results provided more rigorous support of the original authors' positions and provided valuable supplemental findings as well. Additionally, {cfa} was applied to an artificial data set. Intuitive interpretations of the artificial data were compared with the results of the {cfa}. The results showed that the intuitive approach can lead to highly spurious conclusions regarding convergent and discriminant validity. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Situational specificity in assessment center ratings: A confirmatory factor analysis.

Assessment center ratings of eight abilities from each of five situational exercises were examined for their cross-situational consistency and discriminant validity. A series of confirmatory factor analyses revealed that the ratings were largely (if not totally) situation specific, and that assessors failed to distinguish among the eight target abilities. These results combined with previous research suggest that the assessment center method measures mainly situation-specific performance, not cross-situational managerial abilities. We suggest that the intended constructs might be better measured if more ability-related behaviors were elicited within each exercise and if the cognitive demands placed on assessors were reduced. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Goodness-of-fit indexes in confirmatory factor analysis: The effect of sample size.

In confirmatory factor analysis, hypothesized models reflect approximations to reality so that any model can be rejected if the sample size is large enough. In the present article, we examine the influence of sample size on different fit indexes for both real and simulated data. Contrary to claims by Bentler and Bonett (1980), their incremental fit index was substantially affected by sample size. Contrary to claims by Joreskog and Sorbom (1981), their goodness-of-fit indexes provided by {lisrel} were substantially affected by sample size. Contrary to claims by Bollen (1986), his new incremental fit index was substantially affected by sample size. Hoelter's (1983) critical N index was also substantially affected by sample size. Of the more than 30 indexes considered, the Tucker-Lewis (1973) index was the only widely used index that was relatively independent of sample size. However, four new indexes based on the same form as the Tucker-Lewis index were also relatively independent of sample size. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

A hierarchical factor analysis of foreman behavior.

"Ratings of [141] industrial foremen were made using a check list. Scores on 18 variables representing six hypothesized aspects of supervisory behavior were factor analyzed using the hierarchical factor model. A detailed explanation of the application of the hierarchical model is given. In terms of the present data, four factors were found, one a general or 'halo' factor and three interpretable factors. These were described in terms of their meaning and variance. The factors were designated as Social Relations, Technical Job Knowledge, and Administrative Skills and are similar to several previously reported. It is concluded that the hierarchical factor model is a useful technique for the analysis of intercorrelations of trait ratings." (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Evaluation of a model of attention with confirmatory factor analysis.

Structural equation modeling (specifically, analysis of moment structures; J. L. Arbuckle, 1996) was used to evaluate the goodness of fit of a model of components of attention (A. E. Mirsky, B. J. Anthony, C. C. Duncan, M. B. Aheam, & S. G. Kellam, 1991) to neuropsychological test data from 2 samples. One sample consisted of psychiatrically normal persons with and without sleep-disordered breathing, and the other sample consisted of the adults studied by A. F. Mirsky et al. (1991), who gave rise to this model. That sample included psychiatric patients as well as normals. An exploratory data reduction procedure, principal-components analysis, suggested that attention might be conceptualized as composed of 4 independent elements or components: focus-execute, sustain, shift, and encode. Neither the proposed orthogonal model nor a model permitting correlated factors adequately fit either data set, suggesting that these 4 attention constructs are as yet not clearly validated in the measures used to assess them. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Marital conventionalization as a measure of marital satisfaction: A confirmatory factor analysis.

It has been suggested that self-report measures of marital satisfaction are contaminated by a social desirability bias, which V. H. Edmonds (1967) termed marital conventionalization. Subsequent research showed that marital satisfaction measures were strongly correlated with marital conventionalization but not with social desirability scales. Because these measures tend to be so strongly correlated, this study examined whether marital satisfaction and conventionalization are best seen as 2 separate constructs or as a single construct. These measures were found to have 1 underlying factor based on confirmatory factor analyses with a sample of 2,109 individuals. Further analysis suggested that the relationship between marital satisfaction and conventionalization scales differs depending on the level of marital satisfaction. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Dimensions of foreman performance: A factor analysis of criterion measures.

Data pertaining to the value of measures of foreman performance were subjected to factor analysis. 20 criterion variables, 9 ratings, and 11 objective measures were used with 102 foremen in one plant and 104 in another. "Four meaningful dimensions were identified by factor analyzing the measures separately for each plant. Relevance weights for the dimensions were derived from superintendents' relevance rankings of the 20 variables." (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Construct validity of multiple job performance measures using confirmatory factor analysis.

The construct validity of job performance ratings obtained from self, supervisors, and peers was assessed relative to performance data obtained from an objective test of task proficiency. Data were gathered from a sample of 256 first-term jet engine mechanics in the U.S. Air Force. Widaman's (1985) approach to assessment of convergent and discriminant validity of multitrait–multimethod data using confirmatory factor analysis to contrast alternative models was used. As expected, all analyses revealed support for a model with correlated performance traits and uncorrelated methods. Significant convergence among the three rating sources was found. In addition, convergence was found between task ratings and scores from the objective proficiency test. Significant discriminant validity was found in all of the analyses. Results revealed that self, supervisors, and peers can be equally valid as sources of performance information, although performance of some tasks may be more validly evaluated by one source than another. Needs for further research on the effects of task characteristics on the validity of ratings are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Organization of children's academic self-perceptions: Reanalysis and counter-interpretations of confirmatory factor analysis results.

S. M. Simpson, B. G. Licht, R. K. Wagner, and S. R. Stader (1996) factor analyzed responses to 4 ability-related self-perceptions (perceived ability, near expectancies, distant expectancies, and causal attributions) for each of 3 academic domains (math, reading–English, and school). They interpreted their confirmatory factor analysis as supporting the need to distinguish between these 4 self-perceptions as well as the 3 domains and to extend current academic self-concept theories (e.g., H. W. Marsh, 1990, 1993a) that emphasize the domains. Interpretations based on the authors' reanalysis of Simpson et al.'s data contradicted their major conclusions that apparently reflected idiosyncrasies in their items and their methodology, but supported predictions based on previous theory and research. More generally, the authors demonstrate a construct validity approach that blends theory, data, statistical models, and substantive interpretation to validate and compare competing interpretations. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Hierarchical confirmatory factor analysis of the Child Behavior Checklist/4–18.

Hierarchical confirmatory factor analysis was used to evaluate the 2-factor 2nd-order structure of T. M. Achenbach's ( 1991 ) Child Behavior Checklist in a sample of 577 children who had been identified as having serious emotional disturbance. An alternative 1-factor 2nd-order model also was tested. Results supported T. M. Achenbach's model in which the broadband Internalizing factor was represented by the narrowband Withdrawn, Somatic, and Anxious/Depressed syndromes, and the broadband Externalizing factor was represented by the narrowband Delinquent and Aggressive syndromes. Consistent with T. M. Achenbach's model, the remaining narrowband syndromes (i.e., Social, Thought, Attention ) loaded equally on both broadband factors and should not be included in scoring either Internalizing or Externalizing. Fit of the 1-factor model also was good and only slightly poorer than the 2-factor model. Therefore, an overall score would be appropriate as a measure of global problem behavior. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Patients' and therapists' shared and unique views of the therapeutic alliance: An investigation using confirmatory factor analysis in a nested design.

Analyzed large general factor found in measures of the therapeutic alliance by use of confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) in a nested design. Ratings by 38 therapists and their 144 patients on the California Psychotherapy Alliance Scales (CALPAS), the Revised Penn Helping Alliance Questionnaire (HAQ-R), and the Working Alliance Inventory (WAI) were adjusted for therapist effects. A set of models for S and therapist ratings was tested with CFA, and a 3-factor model was confirmed, x–2(4)?=? 7.19, p> .13; GFI?=?.98; RMSR?=?.02; CFI?=?1.0. A shared-view factor (best represented by HAQ-R) accounted for 44% of patients' and 27% of therapists' variance. Unique factors accounted for 56% of therapists' and 43% of Ss' variance. S views split between HAQ and WAI factors; The WAI factor was most expressive of therapist views. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)