Underlying Common Factors of Adolescent Problem Behaviors

2002 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 161-182 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lening Zhang ◽  
John W. Welte ◽  
William F. Wieczorek
Keyword(s):  
Problem Behaviors ◽  
Latent Variable ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Common Factor ◽  
Measurement Model ◽  
First Order ◽  
Adolescent Problem Behaviors ◽  
The Common ◽  
Order Factor ◽  
Second Order Factor Analysis

The Buffalo Longitudinal Study of Young Men was used to address the possibility of a common factor underlying adolescent problem behaviors. First, a measurement model with a single first-order factor was compared to a model with three separate correlated first-order factors. The three-factor model was better supported, making it logical to conduct a second-order factor analysis, which confirmed the logic. Second, a substantive model was estimated in each of two waves with psychopathic state as the common factor predicting drinking, drug use, and delinquency. Psychopathic state was stable across waves. The theory that a single latent variable accounts for large covariance among adolescent problem behaviors was supported.

scholarly journals Toward a Causal Interpretation of the Common Factor Model

Disputatio ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (47) ◽  
pp. 581-601 ◽  
Author(s):  
Riet Van Bork ◽  
Lisa D. Wijsen ◽  
Mijke Rhemtulla
Keyword(s):  
Latent Variable ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Causal Structure ◽  
Common Factor ◽  
Statistical Interpretation ◽  
Causal Interpretation ◽  
Psychological Constructs ◽  
Common Factor Model ◽  
The Common ◽  
Research Questions

Abstract Psychological constructs such as personality dimensions or cognitive traits are typically unobserved and are therefore measured by observing so-called indicators of the latent construct (e.g., responses to questionnaire items or observed behavior). The Common Factor Model (CFM) models the relations between the observed indicators and the latent variable. In this article we argue in favor of interpreting the CFM as a causal model rather than merely a statistical model, in which common factors are only descriptions of the indicators. When there is sufficient reason to hypothesize that the underlying causal structure of the data is a common cause structure, a causal interpretation of the CFM has several benefits over a merely statistical interpretation of the model. We argue that (1) a causal interpretation conforms with most research questions in which the goal is to explain the correlations between indicators rather than merely summarizing them; (2) a causal interpretation of the factor model legitimizes the focus on shared, rather than unique variance of the indicators; and (3) a causal interpretation of the factor model legitimizes the assumption of local independence.

Challenging the Multidimensional Conception of Perceived Person-Environment Fit

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Julian M. Etzel ◽  
Gabriel Nagy
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
University Students ◽  
Educational Outcomes ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Higher Order ◽  
Substantial Proportion ◽  
Unique Variance ◽  
First Order ◽  
Person Environment Fit ◽  
Order Factor

Abstract. In the current study, we examined the viability of a multidimensional conception of perceived person-environment (P-E) fit in higher education. We introduce an optimized 12-item measure that distinguishes between four content dimensions of perceived P-E fit: interest-contents (I-C) fit, needs-supplies (N-S) fit, demands-abilities (D-A) fit, and values-culture (V-C) fit. The central aim of our study was to examine whether the relationships between different P-E fit dimensions and educational outcomes can be accounted for by a higher-order factor that captures the shared features of the four fit dimensions. Relying on a large sample of university students in Germany, we found that students distinguish between the proposed fit dimensions. The respective first-order factors shared a substantial proportion of variance and conformed to a higher-order factor model. Using a newly developed factor extension procedure, we found that the relationships between the first-order factors and most outcomes were not fully accounted for by the higher-order factor. Rather, with the exception of V-C fit, all specific P-E fit factors that represent the first-order factors’ unique variance showed reliable and theoretically plausible relationships with different outcomes. These findings support the viability of a multidimensional conceptualization of P-E fit and the validity of our adapted instrument.

scholarly journals Can We Compare Solidarity Across Europe? What, Why, When, and How to Assess Exact and Approximate Equivalence of First- and Second-Order Factor Models

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vera Lomazzi
Keyword(s):  
Factor Model ◽  
Second Order ◽  
Three Dimensions ◽  
Alignment Method ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Political Values ◽  
First Order ◽  
Measurement Models ◽  
European Values ◽  
Order Factor

Although measurement invariance is widely considered a precondition for meaningful cross-sectional comparisons, substantive studies have often neglected evaluating this assumption, thereby risking drawing conclusions and making theoretical generalizations based on misleading results. This study offers a theoretical overview of the key issues concerning the measurement and the comparison of socio-political values and aims to answer the questions of what must be evaluated, why, when, and how to assess measurement equivalence. This paper discusses the implications of formative and reflective approaches to the measurement of socio-political values and introduces challenges in their comparison across different countries. From this perspective, exact and approximate approaches to equivalence are described as well as their empirical translation in statistical techniques, such as the multigroup confirmatory factor analysis (MGCFA) and the frequentist alignment method. To illustrate the application of these methods, the study investigates the construct of solidarity as measured by European Values Study (EVS) and using data collected in 34 countries in the last wave of the EVS (2017–2020). The concept is captured through a battery of nine items reflecting three dimensions of solidarity: social, local, and global. Two measurement models are hypothesized: a first-order factor model, in which the three independent dimensions of solidarity are correlated, and a second-order factor model, in which solidarity is conceived according to a hierarchical principle, and the construct of solidarity is reflected in the three sub-factors. In testing the equivalence of the first-order factor model, the results of the MGCFA indicated that metric invariance was achieved. The alignment method supported approximate equivalence only when the model was reduced to two factors, excluding global solidarity. The second-order factor model fit the data of only seven countries, in which this model could be used to study solidarity as a second-order concept. However, the comparison across countries resulted not appropriate at any level of invariance. Finally, the implications of these results for further substantive research are discussed.

scholarly journals Examining the Impostor-Profile—Is There a General Impostor Characteristic?

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabio Ibrahim ◽  
Johann-Christoph Münscher ◽  
Philipp Yorck Herzberg
Keyword(s):  
Convergent Validity ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Second Order ◽  
Model Fit ◽  
Impostor Phenomenon ◽  
General Factor ◽  
Order Model ◽  
First Order ◽  
Order Factor ◽  
Best Fit

The Impostor-Profile (IPP) is a six-dimensional questionnaire measuring the Impostor Phenomenon facets. This study aims to test (a) the appropriateness of a total score, (b) measurement invariance (MI) between gender, (c) the reliability of the IPP, and (d) the convergent validity of the IPP subscales. The sample consisted of N = 482 individuals (64% female). To identify whether the scales of the IPP form a total score, we compared four models: (1) six correlating subscales, (2) a general factor model, (3) a second-order model with one second-order factor and six first-order factors, and (4) a bifactorial model with six group factors. The bifactorial model obtained the best fit. This supports the assumption of a total impostor score. The inspection of structural validity between gender subgroups showed configural, metric, and partial scalar MI. Factor mean comparisons supported the assumption that females and males differ in latent means of the Impostor Phenomenon expressions. The omega coefficients showed sufficient reliability (≥0.71), except for the subscale Need for Sympathy. Overall, the findings of the bifactor model fit and construct validity support the assumption that the measurement through total expression is meaningful in addition to the theoretically formulated multidimensionality of the Impostor Phenomenon.

An Image Scale for Nonprofit Voluntary Organizations

1988 ◽  
Vol 17 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 70-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Greg Bonner ◽  
William R. George
Keyword(s):  
Semantic Differential ◽  
Measurement Scale ◽  
Voluntary Organizations ◽  
Reliable Measurement ◽  
First Order ◽  
Reliability Estimates ◽  
Alpha Reliability ◽  
Order Factor ◽  
Coefficient Alpha Reliability ◽  
Second Order Factor Analysis

An inventory of scale items for a tailormade semantic differential is developed to measure the image of nonprofit voluntary organizations. The sixty-three items yield twelve first-order factors. Second-order factor analysis provides unifying constructs within the domain of voluntary organizations’ image. Coefficient alpha reliability estimates indicate a highly reliable measurement scale.

scholarly journals Group climate, cohesion and curative climate. A study on the common factors in group process and their relation with members attachment dimensions

2015 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Salvatore Gullo ◽  
Gianluca Lo Coco ◽  
Carla Di Fratello ◽  
Francesca Giannone ◽  
Giuseppe Mannino ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Group Process ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Negative Relationship ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Model Fit ◽  
Group Climate ◽  
First Order ◽  
The Common ◽  
Attachment Dimensions ◽  
Positive Work

This study examined the relationships among group process measured by the Group Climate Questionnaire, the Cohesion to the Therapist Scale and Cohesion to the Group Scale, and the Curative Climate Instrument to explore higher order factors that explained the group relationship, in a sample of 91 female university students attending 6 interpersonal growth groups. Furthermore, the study examined how group member’s attachment dimensions, anxiety and avoidance, were associated to his/her perception of group relationship. We found that a three-factor model consisting of  positive bond, positive work, and negative relationship, approached conventional standards of model fit. Moreover, the results of the study also supported a model with three latent second-order constructs (bond, work, and negative relationship) and two structural perspectives as first-order factors (member-group and member-leader). Contrary to the hypothesis, the theoretical model on the associations between individual’s attachment dimensions and group process did not fit well to the data. The results of the current study further supported the cross-cultural validation of a model with both quality and structure dimensions of group relationship. Implications for group process research are discussed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document