APROXIMACIÓN CONCEPTUAL Y PRÁCTICA A LOS MODELOS DE ECUACIONES ESTRUCTURALES
Resumen
En el presente trabajo se expone una aproximación conceptual y práctica a los Modelos de Ecuaciones Estructurales o Structural Equation Modeling (SEM). Los SEM están considerados entre las herramientas más potentes para el estudio de relaciones causales en datos no experimentales. Son una combinación del análisis factorial y la regresión múltiple y están compuestos por dos componentes: el modelo de medida y el modelo estructural. El modelo de medida describe la relación existente entre una serie de variables observables; mientras que en el modelo estructural se especifican las relaciones hipotetizadas entre las variables, es decir, se describen las relaciones entre las variables latentes mediante el uso de flechas. Llevar a cabo un SEM involucra cinco etapas: 1) Especificación del Modelo; 2) Identificación del Modelo; 3) Estimación del Modelo; 4) Evaluación del Modelo y 5) Re-especificación del Modelo. El presente artículo provee una serie de guías de “buenas prácticas” para realizar análisis SEM, con ejemplos utilizando el programa AMOS.Descargas
Citas
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
