Affiliation:
1. Institute of Positive Psychology and Education Australian Catholic University Sydney New South Wales Australia
2. Department of Education University of Oxford Oxford UK
3. Department of English King Faisal University Hofuf Saudi Arabia
4. The University of New South Wales (UNSW) Sydney Australia
Abstract
AbstractExploratory structural equation modelling (ESEM) is an alternative to the well‐known method of confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). ESEM is mainly used to assess the quality of measurement models of common factors but can be efficiently extended to test structural models. However, ESEM may not be the best option in some model specifications, especially when structural models are involved, because the full flexibility of ESEM could result in technical difficulties in model estimation. Thus, set‐ESEM was developed to accommodate the balance between full‐ESEM and CFA. In the present paper, we show examples where set‐ESEM should be used rather than full‐ESEM. Rather than relying on a simulation study, we provide two applied examples using real data that are included in the OSF repository. Additionally, we provide the code needed to run set‐ESEM in the free R package lavaan to make the paper practical. Set‐ESEM structural models outperform their CFA‐based counterparts in terms of goodness of fit and realistic factor correlation, and hence path coefficients in the two empirical examples. In several instances, effects that were non‐significant (i.e., attenuated) in the CFA‐based structural model become larger and significant in the set‐ESEM structural model, suggesting that set‐ESEM models may generate more accurate model parameters and, hence, lower Type II error rate.
Cited by
6 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献