Based on questions I’ve been asked by clients, most analysts prefer using the factor analysis procedures in their general statistical software to run a confirmatory factor analysis.
While this can work in some situations, you’re losing out on some key information you’d get from a structural equation model. This article highlights one of these.
Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) is the fundamental first step in running most types of SEM models. You want to do this first to verify the measurement quality of any and all latent constructs you’re using in your structural equation model.
The last, and sometimes hardest, step for running any statistical model is writing up results.
As with most other steps, this one is a bit more complicated for structural equation models than it is for simpler models like linear regression.
Any good statistical report includes enough information that someone else could replicate your results with your data.
Most analysts would respond, “a mixed model,” but have you ever heard of latent growth curves? How about latent trajectories, latent curves, growth curves, or time paths, which are other names for the same approach?
We get many questions from clients who use the terms mediator and moderator interchangeably.
They are easy to confuse, yet mediation and moderation are two distinct terms that require distinct statistical approaches.
The key difference between the concepts can be compared to a case where a moderator lets you know when an association will occur while a mediator will inform you how or why it occurs.
Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) increasingly is a ‘must’ for researchers in the social sciences and business analytics. However, the issue of how consistent the theoretical model is with the data, known as model fit, is by no means agreed upon: There is an abundance of fit indices available – and wide disparity in agreement on which indices to report and what the cut-offs for various indices actually are. (more…)