Goodness of Fit in Item Factor Analysis: Effect of the Number of Response Alternatives

REFERENCES

• Akaike, H. (1974). A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 19, 716–723. doi:10.1109/TAC.1974.1100705
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bentler, P. M. (1995). EQS 5 [Computer program]. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software.
   Google Scholar
• Bernstein, I., & Teng, G. (1989). Factoring items and factoring scales are different: Spurious evidence for multidimensionality due to item categorization. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 467–477. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.105.3.467
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Browne, M. W. (1984). Asymptotically distribution-free methods for the analysis of covariance structures. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 37, 62–83. doi:10.1111/bmsp.1984.37.issue-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. doi:10.1177/0049124192021002005
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Psychology Press. doi:10.4324/9780203771587
   Google Scholar
• Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1985). The NEO Personality Inventory. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
   Google Scholar
• Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI–R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO–FFI) manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
   Google Scholar
• Cudeck, R., & Browne, M. W. (1992). Constructing a covariance matrix that yields a specified minimizer and a specified minimum discrepancy function value. Psychometrika, 57, 357–369. doi:10.1007/bf02295424
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Curran, P. J., West, S. G., & Finch, G. F. (1996). The robustness of test statistics to nonnormality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 1, 16–29. doi:10.1037/1082-989x.1.1.16
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D’Zurilla, T. J., Nezu, A. M., & Maydeu-Olivares, A. (2002). Manual of the Social Problem-Solving Inventory–Revised. North Tonawanda, NY: Multi-Health Systems. doi:10.1037/10805-001
   Google Scholar
• Eysenck, S. B. G., Eysenck, H. J., & Barrett, P. (1985). A revised version of the Psychoticism scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 6, 21–29. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(85)90026-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forero, C. G., & Maydeu-Olivares, A. (2009). Estimation of IRT graded response models: Limited versus full information methods. Psychological Methods, 14, 275–299. doi:10.1037/a0015825
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forero, C. G., Maydeu-Olivares, A., & Gallardo-Pujol, D. (2009). Factor analysis with ordinal indicators: A Monte Carlo study comparing DWLS and ULS estimation. Structural Equation Modeling, 16, 625–641. doi:10.1080/10705510903203573
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gorsuch, R. L. (1974). Factor analysis. Philadelphia, PA: W. B. Saunders.
   Google Scholar
• Green, S. B. (1983). Identifiability of spurious factors using linear factor analysis with binary items. Applied Psychological Measurement, 7, 139–147. doi:10.1177/014662168300700202
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green, S. B., Akey, T. M., Fleming, K. K., Hershberger, S. L., & Marquis, J. G. (1997). Effect of the number of scale points on chi-square fit indices in confirmatory factor analysis. Structural Equation Modeling, 4, 108–120. doi:10.1080/10705519709540064
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hu, L.-T., & Bentler, P. M. (1995). Evaluating model fit. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling. Concepts, issues and appliations (pp. 76–99). London, UK: Sage. doi:10.1080/10705519909540118
   Google Scholar
• Lissitz, R. W., & Green, S. B. (1975). Effect of the number of scale points on reliability: A Monte Carlo approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60(1), 10–13. doi:10.1037/h0076268
   Google Scholar
• Maydeu-Olivares, A. (2017a). Maximum likelihood estimation of structural equation models for continuous data: Standard errors and goodness of fit. Structural Equation Modeling. doi:10.1080/10705511.2016.1269606
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maydeu-Olivares, A. (2017b). Assessing the size of model misfit in structural equation models. Psychometrika. doi:10.1007/s11336-016-9552-7
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Maydeu-Olivares, A., Cai, L., & Hernández, A. (2011). Comparing the fit of item response theory and factor analysis models. Structural Equation Modeling, 18, 333–356. doi:10.1080/10705511.2011.581993
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maydeu-Olivares, A., Coffman, D. L., & Hartmann, W. M. (2007). Asymptotically distribution-free (ADF) interval estimation of coefficient alpha. Psychological Methods, 12, 157–176. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.12.4.433
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maydeu-Olivares, A., Kramp, U., García-Forero, C., Gallardo-Pujol, D., & Coffman, D. (2009). The effect of varying the number of response alternatives in rating scales: Experimental evidence from intra-individual effects. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 295–308. doi:10.3758/BRM.41.2.295
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maydeu-Olivares, A., Rodriguez-Fornells, A., Gomez-Benito, J., D’Zurilla, T. J., Gómez-Benito, J., & D’Zurilla, T. J. (2000). Psychometric properties of the Spanish adaptation of the Social Problem-Solving Inventory–Revised (SPSI–R). Personality and Individual Differences, 29, 699–708. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(99)00226-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDonald, R. P. (1999). Test theory: A unified approach. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• McDonald, R. P., & Ahlawat, K. S. (1974). Difficulty factors in binary data. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 27, 82–99. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8317.1974.tb00530.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muthén, B. (1993). Goodness of fit with categorical and other nonnormal variables. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 205–234). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Muthén, B., & Kaplan, D. (1985). A comparison of some methodologies for the factor analysis of non-normal Likert variables. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 45, 19–30. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8317.1992.tb00975.x
   Google Scholar
• Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2014). Mplus 7.3 [Computer program]. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
   Google Scholar
• Olsson, U. H., Foss., T., & Troye, S. V. (2003). Does the ADF fit function decrease when the kurtosis increase? British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 56, 289–303. doi:10.1348/000711003770480057
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Satorra, A., & Bentler, P. M. (1994). Corrections to test statistics and standard errors in covariance structure analysis. In A. Von Eye & C. C. Clogg (Eds.), Latent variable analysis: Applications for developmental research (pp. 399–419). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Schwarz, G. (1978). Estimating the dimension of a model. The Annals of Statistics, 6, 461–464. doi:10.1214/aos/1176344136
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steiger, J. H. (1990). Structural model evaluation and modification: An interval estimation approach. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 173–180. doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr2502_4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steiger, J. H., & Lind, J. C. (1980, May 30). Statistically-based tests for the number of common factors. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Psychometric Society, Iowa City, Iowa.
   Google Scholar
• Symonds, P. M. (1924). On the loss of reliability in ratings due to coarseness of the scale. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 7(6), 456–461. doi:10.1037/h0074469
   Google Scholar
• Tucker, L. R., & Lewis, C. (1973). The reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 38, 1–10. doi:10.1007/bf02291170
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yuan, K. H., Bentler, P. M., & Zhang, W. (2005). The effect of skewness and kurtosis on mean and covariance structure analysis. Sociological Methods & Research, 34, 240–258. doi:10.1177/0049124105280200
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar