Conceptual and Practical Approach to Structural Equations Modeling
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.19083/ridu.11.486Keywords:
Modelos de Ecuaciones Estructurales, AMOS, análisis factorial, regresión múltipleAbstract
This methodological article explains a conceptual and practical approach to Structural Equation Models or Structural Equation Modeling (SEM). SEMs are considered among the most powerful tools for the study of causal relationships in non-experimental data. They are a combination of factor analysis and multiple regression and are composed of two components: the measurement model and the structural model. The measurement model describes the relationship between a series of observable variables; while in the structural model the relationships between variables are hypothesized; i.e., the relationships between latent variables are described with the use of arrows. Performing a SEM involves five stages: (1) A specification of the Model; (2) Identification of the Model; (3) Estimation of the Model; (4) Evaluation of the Model and (5) Re-specification of the Model. This article provides a series of guidelines on “best practices” for SEM analysis, with examples using the AMOS program.
References
Arbuckle, J. L. (1997). Amos Users’ Guide. Version 3.6. Chicago: SmallWaters Corporation.
Aron, A. & Aron, E. (2001) Estadística para Psicología. Buenos Aires: Pearson Education.
Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (2012). Specification, evaluation, and interpretation of structural equation models. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 40(1), 8-34. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11747-011-0278-x
Barrett, P. (2007). Structural equation modelling: Adjudging model fit. Personality and Individual differences, 42(5), 815-824. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.09.018
Batista-Foguet, J. M. & Coenders, G. (2000). Modelos de Ecuaciones Estructurales. Madrid: La Muralla, S.A.
Bentler, P. M. (1985). Theory and implementation of EQS: A structural equations program. Los Angeles: BMDP Statistical Software
Bentler, P. M. (2007). On tests and indices for evaluating structural models. Personality and Individual Differences, 42(5), 825-829. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.09.024
Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological bulletin, 88(3), 588-606. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588
Blalock, H. M., Jr. (1964). Causal inferences in non experimenta research. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
Bollen, K. A. (1990). Overall fit in covariance structure models: two types of sample size effects. Psychological bulletin, 107(2), 256-259.
Boomsma, A., & Hoogland, J. J. (2001). The robustness of LISREL modeling revisited. Structural equation models: Present and future. A Festschrift in honor of Karl Jöreskog, 139-168.
Browne, M. W., MacCallum, R. C., Kim, C. T., Andersen, B. L., & Glaser, R. (2002). When fit indices and residuals are incompatible. Psychological methods, 7(4), 403-421. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037//1082-989X.7.4.403
Byrne, B. M. (2001). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Cheung, G. W., & Lau, R. S. (2008). Testing mediation and suppression effects of latent variables: Bootstrapping with structural equation models. Organizational Research Methods, 11(2), 296-325. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428107300343
DiStefano, C., & Hess, B. (2005). Using confirmatory factor analysis for construct validation: An empirical review. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 23(3), 225-241. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/073428290502300303
Enders, C. K. (2005). An SAS macro for implementing the modified Bollen-Stine bootstrap for missing data: Implementing the bootstrap using existing structural equation modeling software. Structural Equation Modeling, 12(4), 620-641.
Fan, X. (2003). Using commonly available software for bootstrapping in both substantive and measurement analyses. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 63(1), 24-50. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164402239315
Finch, J. F., West, S. G., & MacKinnon, D. P. (1997). Effects of sample size and nonnormality on the estimation of mediated effects in latent variable models. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 4(2), 87-107. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10705519709540063
Flora, D. B., & Curran, P. J. (2004). An empirical evaluation of alternative methods of estimation for confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data. Psychological methods, 9(4), 466. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.9.4.466
Hawking S. W. & Mlodino L. (2010). The Grand Desing. New York: Bantam Books. Hayduk, L., Cummings, G., Boadu, K., Pazderka-Robinson, H., & Boulianne, S. (2007). Testing! testing! one, two, three–Testing the theory in structural equation models!. Personality and Individual Differences, 42(5), 841-850. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.10.001
Hooper, D., Coughlan, J. and Mullen, M. R. (2008). Structural Equation Modelling: Guidelines for Determining Model Fit. The Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6(1), 53–60.
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural equation modeling: a multidisciplinary journal, 6(1), 1-55. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
Hu, L. T., Bentler, P. M., & Kano, Y. (1992). Can test statistics in covariance structure analysis be trusted? Psychological bulletin, 112(2), 351. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.112.2.351
Iacobucci, D. (2009). Everything you always wanted to know about SEM (structural equations modeling) but were afraid to ask. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 19(4), 673-680. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2009.09.002
Iacobucci, D. (2010). Structural equations modeling: Fit indices, sample size, and advanced topics. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 20(1), 90-98. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2009.09.003
Jackson, D. L., Gillaspy Jr, J. A., & Purc-Stephenson, R. (2009). Reporting practices in confirmatory factor analysis: an overview and some recommendations. Psychological methods, 14(1), 6-23. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0014694
Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford
Ledesma, R. (2008). Introduccción al Bootstrap. Desarrollo de un ejemplo acompañado de software de aplicación. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 4(2), 51-60.
León, O. G. & Montero I. (2003). Métodos de Investigación en Psicología y Educación (3ra edición). España: Mc Graw Hill.
Little, T. D., Cunningham, W. A., Shahar, G., & Widaman, K. F.(2002). To parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question, weighing the merits. Structural equation modeling, 9(2), 151-173.
MacCallum, R. C., & Austin, J. T. (2000). Applications of structural equation modeling in psychological research. Annual review of psychology, 51(1), 201-226. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.51.1.201
Markland, D. (2007). The golden rule is that there are no golden rules: A commentary on Paul Barrett’s recommendations for reporting model fit in structural equation modelling. Personality and Individual Differences, 42(5), 851-858. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.09.023
Marsh, H. W., Hau, K. T., & Wen, Z. (2004). In search of golden rules: Comment on hypothesis-testing approaches to setting cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler’s (1999) findings. Structural equation modeling, 11(3), 320-341. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15328007sem1103_2
Martens, M. P., & Haase, R. F. (2006). Advanced applications of structural equation modeling in counseling psychology research. The Counseling Psychologist, 34(6), 878-911. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000005283395
McKnight, P. E., McKnight, K. M., Sidani, S., & Figueredo, A. J.(2007). Missing data: A gentle introduction. Guilford Press.
Medrano, L. A., Muñoz-Navarro, R., & Cano-Vindel, A. (2016). Procesos cognitivos y regulación emocional: aportes desde una aproximación psicoevolucionista. Ansiedad y Estrés, 22(2-3), 47-54. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.anyes.2016.11.001
Miles, J., & Shevlin, M. (2007). A time and a place for incremental fit indices. Personality and Individual Differences, 42(5), 869-874. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.09.022
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior research methods, 40(3), 879-891. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.3.879
Rodríguez Ayán, M. y Ruiz, M. (2008). Atenuación de la asimetría y de la curtosis de las puntuaciones observadas mediante transformaciones de variables: Incidencia sobre la estructura factorial. Psicológica, 29, 205-227
Ruiz, M. A.; Pardo, A. & San Martin, R. (2010). Modelos de ecuaciones estructurales. Papeles del psicólogo, 31(1), 34-45.
Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of psychological research online, 8(2), 23-74.
Sivo, S. A., Fan, X., Witta, E. L., & Willse, J. T. (2006). The search for” optimal” cutoff properties: Fit index criteria in structural equation modeling. The Journal of Experimental Education, 74(3), 267-288. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/JEXE.74.3.267-288
Weston, R. & Gore Jr., P. A., (2006). A Brief Guide to Structural Equation Modeling. The Counseling Psychologist, 34(5), 719-751. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000006286345
Yuan, K. H. (2005). Fit indices versus test statistics. Multivariate behavioral research, 40(1), 115-148. doi: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr4001_5
