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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Generalized Structured Component Analysis with Uniqueness Terms for Accommodating Measurement Error
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02137 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Heungsun Hwang, Yoshio Takane, Kwanghee Jung |
| Abstract |
Generalized structured component analysis (GSCA) is a component-based approach to structural equation modeling (SEM), where latent variables are approximated by weighted composites of indicators. It has no formal mechanism to incorporate errors in indicators, which in turn renders components prone to the errors as well. We propose to extend GSCA to account for errors in indicators explicitly. This extension, called GSCAM, considers both common and unique parts of indicators, as postulated in common factor analysis, and estimates a weighted composite of indicators with their unique parts removed. Adding such unique parts or uniqueness terms serves to account for measurement errors in indicators in a manner similar to common factor analysis. Simulation studies are conducted to compare parameter recovery of GSCAM and existing methods. These methods are also applied to fit a substantively well-established model to real data. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 41 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 12% |
| Lecturer | 5 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 10% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 17% |
| Unknown | 14 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Business, Management and Accounting | 10 | 24% |
| Mathematics | 4 | 10% |
| Psychology | 3 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Unknown | 16 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 06 December 2017.
All research outputs
#18,576,855
of 23,008,860 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#22,480
of 30,248 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#327,469
of 439,971 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#447
of 528 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,008,860 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,248 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 439,971 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 528 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.