Testing Structural Equation Model. Kenneth A. Bollen and J. Scott Long (Eds. ) Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1993, 320 page ( paperback)
It is a volume can put interested scientists up-to-date on how apply SEM on problems. Broad ideas from researchers in the world about how SEM should be evaluated were introduced including Joreskog’s thought on then state of affaire in goodness-of –fit.
Tanaka provides a alternative indices for goodness-of-fit. Bollen and Stine present their bootstrapping methodology for assessing goodness of fit. How Bayesian information criteria was used to select competing SEMs was talked by Rafferty. Bentler and Chou talked about new statistics to guide the respecification for a model. Joreskog, finally, outlined the problem of translating theory into a statistical model.
A first course in factor analysis (2nd, ed) Andrew L. Comrey and Howard B. Lee, 1992, 430 pages. (SEM 1(3),279-282)
Reviewed by Scott L. Hershberger
“History tells us that methodological techniques, no matter their apparent sophistication, quick fall by the wayside if not useful for the analysis of human behavior.”
Heather E. Bullock , Lisa L. Harlow and Stanley A. Mulaik
Causation issue in structural equation modeling research
How to understand “causal” in causal modeling?
SEM generally was used to analyze the nonexperimental data that have traditional been analyzed using multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) and multivariate analysis of covariance. (p256)
It is important to reiterate that no statistical routine (e.g. MANOVA, SEM) – by itself – can establish causation; causal potential is determined by the degree of control and validity built into the research design. (p257)
Friday, July 29, 2005
BOOK REVIEW (From SEM a Multidisciplinary Journal)
Testing Structural Equation Model. Kenneth A. Bollen and J. Scott Long (Eds. ) Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1993, 320 page ( paperback)
It is a volume can put interested scientists up-to-date on how apply SEM on problems. Broad ideas from researchers in the world about how SEM should be evaluated were introduced including Joreskog’s thought on then state of affaire in goodness-of –fit.
Tanaka provides a alternative indices for goodness-of-fit. Bollen and Stine present their bootstrapping methodology for assessing goodness of fit. How Bayesian information criteria was used to select competing SEMs was talked by Rafferty. Bentler and Chou talked about new statistics to guide the respecification for a model. Joreskog, finally, outlined the problem of translating theory into a statistical model.
A first course in factor analysis (2nd, ed) Andrew L. Comrey and Howard B. Lee, 1992, 430 pages. (SEM 1(3),279-282)
Reviewed by Scott L. Hershberger
“History tells us that methodological techniques, no matter their apparent sophistication, quick fall by the wayside if not useful for the analysis of human behavior.”
Heather E. Bullock , Lisa L. Harlow and Stanley A. Mulaik
Causation issue in structural equation modeling research
How to understand “causal” in causal modeling?
SEM generally was used to analyze the nonexperimental data that have traditional been analyzed using multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) and multivariate analysis of covariance. (p256)
It is important to reiterate that no statistical routine (e.g. MANOVA, SEM) – by itself – can establish causation; causal potential is determined by the degree of control and validity built into the research design. (p257)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment