Evaluating estimation methods for ordinal data in structural equation modeling

This study examined the performance of two alternative estimation approaches in structural equation modeling for ordinal data under different levels of model misspecification, score skewness, sample size, and model size. Both approaches involve analyzing a polychoric correlation matrix as well as adjusting standard error estimates and model chi-squared, but one estimates model parameters with maximum likelihood and the other with robust weighted least-squared. Relative bias in parameter estimates and standard error estimates, Type I error rate, and empirical power of the model test, where appropriate, were evaluated through Monte Carlo simulations. These alternative approaches generally provided unbiased parameter estimates when the model was correctly specified. They also provided unbiased standard error estimates and adequate Type I error control in general unless sample size was small and the measured variables were moderately skewed. Differences between the methods in convergence problems and the evaluation criteria, especially under small sample and skewed variable conditions, were discussed.

[1]  P M Bentler,et al.  A two-stage estimation of structural equation models with continuous and polytomous variables. , 1995, The British journal of mathematical and statistical psychology.

[2]  D. Flora,et al.  An empirical evaluation of alternative methods of estimation for confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data. , 2004, Psychological methods.

[3]  Willem E. Saris,et al.  Alternative approaches to structural modeling of ordinal data: A Monte Carlo study , 1997 .

[4]  G. Hancock,et al.  Evaluating Small Sample Approaches for Model Test Statistics in Structural Equation Modeling , 2004 .

[5]  B. Muthén,et al.  Robust inference using weighted least squares and quadratic estimating equations in latent variable modeling with categorical and continuous outcomes , 1997 .

[6]  A. Boomsma,et al.  Robustness Studies in Covariance Structure Modeling , 1998 .

[7]  B. Muthén A general structural equation model with dichotomous, ordered categorical, and continuous latent variable indicators , 1984 .

[8]  Peter M. Bentler,et al.  EQS : structural equations program manual , 1989 .

[9]  K. Bollen,et al.  Improper Solutions in Structural Equation Models , 2001 .

[10]  A. Satorra,et al.  Corrections to test statistics and standard errors in covariance structure analysis. , 1994 .

[11]  Christine DiStefano,et al.  The Impact of Categorization With Confirmatory Factor Analysis , 2002 .

[12]  Kenneth A. Bollen,et al.  Structural Equations with Latent Variables , 1989 .

[13]  S. West,et al.  The robustness of test statistics to nonnormality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis. , 1996 .

[14]  Bengt Muthén,et al.  On structural equation modeling with data that are not missing completely at random , 1987 .

[15]  K. Bollen,et al.  The Noncentral Chi-square Distribution in Misspecified Structural Equation Models: Finite Sample Results from a Monte Carlo Simulation , 2002, Multivariate behavioral research.

[16]  T. Micceri The unicorn, the normal curve, and other improbable creatures. , 1989 .

[17]  R. L. Brown Using Covariance Modeling for Estimating Reliability on Scales with Ordered Polytomous Variables , 1989 .

[18]  J. S. Long,et al.  Testing Structural Equation Models , 1993 .

[19]  Ulf Olsson,et al.  Maximum likelihood estimation of the polychoric correlation coefficient , 1979 .

[20]  P M Bentler,et al.  Normal theory based test statistics in structural equation modelling. , 1998, The British journal of mathematical and statistical psychology.

[21]  Clifford C. Clogg,et al.  Latent Variables Analysis: Applications for Developmental Research. , 1995 .

[22]  K. Yuan,et al.  Structural Equation Modeling with Small Samples: Test Statistics. , 1999, Multivariate behavioral research.