↓ Skip to main content

A Solution to Modeling Multilevel Confirmatory Factor Analysis with Data Obtained from Complex Survey Sampling to Avoid Conflated Parameter Estimates

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A Solution to Modeling Multilevel Confirmatory Factor Analysis with Data Obtained from Complex Survey Sampling to Avoid Conflated Parameter Estimates
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, September 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01464
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jiun-Yu Wu, John J. H. Lin, Mei-Wen Nian, Yi-Cheng Hsiao

Abstract

The issue of equality in the between-and within-level structures in Multilevel Confirmatory Factor Analysis (MCFA) models has been influential for obtaining unbiased parameter estimates and statistical inferences. A commonly seen condition is the inequality of factor loadings under equal level-varying structures. With mathematical investigation and Monte Carlo simulation, this study compared the robustness of five statistical models including two model-based (a true and a mis-specified models), one design-based, and two maximum models (two models where the full rank of variance-covariance matrix is estimated in between level and within level, respectively) in analyzing complex survey measurement data with level-varying factor loadings. The empirical data of 120 3rd graders' (from 40 classrooms) perceived Harter competence scale were modeled using MCFA and the parameter estimates were used as true parameters to perform the Monte Carlo simulation study. Results showed maximum models was robust to unequal factor loadings while the design-based and the miss-specified model-based approaches produced conflated results and spurious statistical inferences. We recommend the use of maximum models if researchers have limited information about the pattern of factor loadings and measurement structures. Measurement models are key components of Structural Equation Modeling (SEM); therefore, the findings can be generalized to multilevel SEM and CFA models. Mplus codes are provided for maximum models and other analytical models.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 39 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 31%
Researcher 5 13%
Student > Master 4 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 5%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 9 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 10 26%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 13%
Social Sciences 5 13%
Arts and Humanities 4 10%
Engineering 2 5%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 9 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 October 2017.
All research outputs
#4,025,257
of 22,999,744 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#6,816
of 30,225 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71,701
of 318,608 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#190
of 585 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,999,744 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,225 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 318,608 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 585 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.