On the generalizability of factors: The influence of changing contexts of variables on different methods of factor extraction

The influence of changing contexts of variables on results is often mentioned as a main problem of exploratory factor analysis limiting the generalizability of factors. In the present study, the influence of changing contexts of variables on results of different methods of factor extraction (principal component analysis, principal axis factor analysis, alpha factoring, and maximum likelihood factor analysis) was investigated by means of artificial data. In the first simulation study four factor solutions with pronounced simple structure were created on the basis of artificial data both with 200 and 1000 cases. These four factor solutions represented the context of variables in which a factor was identified. In the second simulation study, a context of variables was created, which completely dissolved one of the four factors composed by four marker variables in the previous study. These data were then analyzed by means of principal component analysis, principal axis factor analysis, alpha factor analysis, and maximum likelihood factor analysis. The factor was less dissolved in principal axis factor analysis, alpha factor analysis, and maximum likelihood factor analysis than in principal component analysis. Moreover, a slight overextraction may also be favorable for the identification of a dissolved factor. On the basis of the results, some recommendations were given in order to perform factor extraction in a way which maximizes the generalizability of factors.

[1]  G Saucier,et al.  Effects of Variable Selection on the Factor Structure of Person Descriptors toward Optimal Variable Sampling in Personality Psychology , 2022 .

[2]  Nigel E. Turner,et al.  The Effect of Common Variance and Structure Pattern on Random Data Eigenvalues: Implications for the Accuracy of Parallel Analysis , 1998 .

[3]  J. Horn.  A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis , 1965, Psychometrika.

[4]  Wayne F. Velicer,et al.  Construct Explication through Factor or Component Analysis: A Review and Evaluation of Alternative Procedures for Determining the Number of Factors or Components , 2000 .

[5]  W F Velicer,et al.  An Empirical Comparison Of The Similarity Of Principal Component, Image, And Factor Patterns. , 1977, Multivariate behavioral research.

[6]  Raymond B. Cattell,et al.  The Meaning and Strategic Use of Factor Analysis , 1988 .

[7]  Henry F. Kaiser,et al.  Alpha factor analysis , 1965, Psychometrika.

[8]  R. Jennrich,et al.  Rotation for simple loadings , 1966, Psychometrika.

[9]  Ming-Mei Wang,et al.  Some new results on factor indeterminacy , 1972 .

[10]  R. Cattell.  The Scree Test For The Number Of Factors. , 1966, Multivariate behavioral research.

[11]  Henry F. Kaiser,et al.  Some Contrasts Between Maximum Likelihood Factor Analysis and Alpha Factor Analysis , 1990 .

[12]  R. Gorsuch,et al.  Component analysis versus common factor analysis: A Monte Carlo study. , 1989 .

[13]  Margaret L. Harris,et al.  A Factor Analytic Interpretation Strategy , 1971 .

[14]  W F Velicer,et al.  An Evaluation of the Effects of Variable Sampling On Component, Image, and Factor Analysis. , 1987, Multivariate behavioral research.

[15]  W. Velicer,et al.  Comparison of five rules for determining the number of components to retain. , 1986 .

[16]  H. Kaiser.  The varimax criterion for analytic rotation in factor analysis , 1958 .

[17]  A. E. Maxwell,et al.  Factor Analysis as a Statistical Method. , 1964 .

[18]  J. Block.  A contrarian view of the five-factor approach to personality description. , 1995, Psychological bulletin.

[19]  R. Goffin,et al.  Problems and Solutions in Human Assessment , 2000 .

[20]  K. Widaman.  Common Factor Analysis Versus Principal Component Analysis: Differential Bias in Representing Model Parameters? , 1993, Multivariate behavioral research.

[21]  J. Guilford.  Factors and factors of personality. , 1975, Psychological bulletin.

[22]  W F Velicer,et al.  Component Analysis versus Common Factor Analysis: Some issues in Selecting an Appropriate Procedure. , 1990, Multivariate behavioral research.

[23]  Donald Ervin Knuth,et al.  The Art of Computer Programming , 1968 .

[24]  B. Brocke.  Das bemerkenswerte Comeback der Differentiellen Psychologie , 2000 .

[25]  J. Buley.  Evaluating Exploratory Factor Analysis Which Initial‐Extraction Techniques Provide the Best Factor Fidelity? , 1995 .

[26]  Louis W. Glorfeld.  An Improvement on Horn's Parallel Analysis Methodology for Selecting the Correct Number of Factors to Retain , 1995 .

[27]  Bruce Thompson,et al.  Program Facstrap: A Program that Computes Bootstrap Estimates of Factor Structure , 1988 .

[28]  Raymond Hubbard,et al.  An empirical comparison of alternative methods for principal component extraction , 1987 .