An investigation of the goodness of fit of the maximum likelihood estimation procedure in factor analysis /

Thesis--Illinois.

The structure of labor market segmentation of occupations : some evidence from factor analysis /

Includes bibliographies (p. 31).

An application of factor analysis to water quality data /

Cover title.

Gray's model of personality and aggregate level factor analysis

Previous research shows that correlations tend to increase in magnitude when individuals are aggregated across groups. This suggests that uncorrelated constellations of personality variables (such as the primary scales of Extraversion and Neuroticism) may display much higher correlations in aggregate factor analysis. We hypothesize and report that individual level factor analysis can be explained in terms of Giant Three (or Big Five) descriptions of personality, whereas aggregate level factor analysis can be explained in terms of Gray's physiological based model. Although alternative interpretations exist, aggregate level factor analysis may correctly identify the basis of an individual's personality as a result of better reliability of measures due to aggregation. We discuss the implications of this form of analysis in terms of construct validity, personality theory, and its applicability in general. Copyright (C) 2003 John Wiley Sons, Ltd.

Drinking refusal self-efficacy questionnaire-revised (DRSEQ-R): a new factor structure with confirmatory factor analysis

The drinking refusal self-efficacy questionnaire (DRSEQ: Young, R.M., Oei, T.P.S., 1996. Drinking expectancy profile: test manual. Behaviour Research and Therapy Centre, University of Queensland, Australia Young, R.M., Oei, T.P.S., Crook, G.M., 1991. Development of a drinking refusal self-efficacy questionnaire. J. Psychopathol. Behav. Assess., 13, 1-15) assesses a person's belief in their ability to resist alcohol. The DRSEQ is a sound psychometric instrument based on exploratory factor analyses, but has not been subjected to confirmatory factor analysis. In total 2773 participants were used to confirm the factor structure of the DRSEQ. Initial analyses revealed that the original structure was not confirmed in the current study. Subsequent analyses resulted in a revised factor structure (DRSEQ-R) being confirmed in community, student and clinical samples. The DRSEQ-R was also found to have good construct and concurrent validity. The factor structure of the DRSEQ-R is more stable than the original structure of the DRSEQ and the revised scale has considerable potential in future alcohol-related research. (c) 2004 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Confirmatory factor analysis and psychometric properties of the Anxiety Sensitivity Index-Revised in clinical and normative populations

The present investigation aimed to critically examine the factor structure and psychometric properties of the Anxiety Sensitivity Index - Revised (ASI-R). Confirmatory factor analysis using a clinical sample of adults (N = 248) revealed that the ASI-R could be improved substantially through the removal of 15 problematic items in order to account for the most robust dimensions of anxiety sensitivity. This modified scale was renamed the 21-item Anxiety Sensitivity Index (21-item ASI) and reanalyzed with a large sample of normative adults (N = 435), revealing configural and metric invariance across groups. Further comparisons with other alternative models, using multi-sample analysis, indicated the 21-item ASI to be the best fitting model for both groups. There was also evidence of internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and construct validity for both samples suggesting that the 21-item ASI is a useful assessment device for investigating the construct of anxiety sensitivity in both clinical and normative populations.

Factor analysis of the self-report Dysexecutive (DEX-S) Questionnaire

The self-rating Dysexecutive Questionnaire (DEX-S) is a recently developed standardized self-report measure of behavioral difficulties associated with executive functioning such as impulsivity, inhibition, control, monitoring, and planning. Few studies have examined its construct validity, particularly for its potential wider use across a variety of clinical and nonclinical populations. This study examines the factor structure of the DEX-S questionnaire using a sample of nonclinical (N = 293) and clinical (N = 49) participants. A series of factor analyses were evaluated to determine the best factor solution for this scale. This was found to be a 4-factor solution with factors best described as inhibition, intention, social regulation, and abstract problem solving. The first 2 factors replicate factors from the 5-factor solutions found in previous studies that examined specific subpopulations. Although further research is needed to evaluate the factor structure within a range of subpopulations, this study supports the view that the DEX has the factor structure sufficient for its use in a wider context than only with neurological or head-injured patients. Overall, a 4-factor solution is recommended as the most stable and parsimonious solution in the wider context.

Factor analysis and discriminant validity:a brief review of some practical issues

Growth in availability and ability of modern statistical software has resulted in greater numbers of research techniques being applied across the marketing discipline. However, with such advances come concerns that techniques may be misinterpreted by researchers. This issue is critical since misinterpretation could cause erroneous findings. This paper investigates some assumptions regarding: 1) the assessment of discriminant validity; and 2) what confirmatory factor analysis accomplishes. Examples that address these points are presented, and some procedural remedies are suggested based upon the literature. This paper is, therefore, primarily concerned with the development of measurement theory and practice. If advances in theory development are not based upon sound methodological practice, we as researchers could be basing our work upon shaky foundations.

Statnote 11: the two-factor analysis of variance

Experiments combining different groups or factors are a powerful method of investigation in applied microbiology. ANOVA enables not only the effect of individual factors to be estimated but also their interactions; information which cannot be obtained readily when factors are investigated separately. In addition, combining different treatments or factors in a single experiment is more efficient and often reduces the number of replications required to estimate treatment effects adequately. Because of the treatment combinations used in a factorial experiment, the degrees of freedom (DF) of the error term in the ANOVA is a more important indicator of the ‘power’ of the experiment than simply the number of replicates. A good method is to ensure, where possible, that sufficient replication is present to achieve 15 DF for each error term of the ANOVA. Finally, in a factorial experiment, it is important to define the design of the experiment in detail because this determines the appropriate type of ANOVA. We will discuss some of the common variations of factorial ANOVA in future statnotes. If there is doubt about which ANOVA to use, the researcher should seek advice from a statistician with experience of research in applied microbiology.

Cross-cultural confirmatory factor analysis of the CES-D in Spanish and Mexican dementia caregivers

The Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression Scale (CES-D) is the most frequently used scale for measuring depressive symptomatology in caregiving research. The aim of this study is to test its construct structure and measurement equivalence between caregivers from two Spanish-speaking countries. Face-to-face interviews were carried out with 595 female dementia caregivers from Madrid, Spain, and from Coahuila, Mexico. The structure of the CES-D was analyzed using exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis (EFA and CFA, respectively). Measurement invariance across samples was analyzed comparing a baseline model with a more restrictive model. Significant differences between means were found for 7 items. The results of the EFA clearly supported a four-factor solution. The CFA for the whole sample with the four factors revealed high and statistically significant loading coefficients for all items (except item number 4). When equality constraints were imposed to test for the invariance between countries, the change in chi-square was significant, indicating that complete invariance could not be assumed. Significant between-countries differences were found for three of the four latent factor mean scores. Although the results provide general support for the original four-factor structure, caution should be exercised on reporting comparisons of depression scores between Spanish-speaking countries.

Conclusion : on multiple levels of analysis, context, contingency and capital

In this concluding chapter, we bring together the threads and reflections on the chapters contained in this text and show how they relate to multi-level issues. The book has focused on the world of Human Resource Management (HRM) and the systems and practices it must put in place to foster innovation. Many of the contributions argue that in order to bring innovation about, organisations have to think carefully about the way in which they will integrate what is, in practice, organisationally relevant — but socially distributed — knowledge. They need to build a series of knowledge-intensive activities and networks, both within their own boundaries and across other important external inter-relationships. In so doing, they help to co-ordinate important information structures. They have, in effect, to find ways of enabling people to collaborate with each other at lower cost, by reducing both the costs of their co-ordination and the levels of unproductive search activity. They have to engineer these behaviours by reducing the risks for people that might be associated with incorrect ideas and help individuals, teams and business units to advance incomplete ideas that are so often difficult to codify. In short, a range of intangible assets must flow more rapidly throughout the organisation and an appropriate balance must be found between the rewards and incentives associated with creativity, novelty and innovation, versus the risks that innovation may also bring.

A globe-kutatás kultúraváltozóinak vizsgálata faktoranalízis segítségével (Cultural variables of the GLOBE research computed by factor analysis)

A szervezeti kultúraváltozók nem függetlenek egymástól. A tanulmány a GLOBE társadalmi kultúra, társadalmi értékek és a kettő különbségéből képzett differenciaváltozók faktoranalízisével kísérel meg főfaktorokat meghatározni és azokat értelmezni. / === / The cultural variables are not independent. This paper describes and discusses consolidated cultural variables computed by factor analysis from 9 original GLOBE variables of societal paracices, societal values, and differentiation scales.

A Q factor analysis of college undergraduate students' study behaviors

The purpose of this study was to better understand the study behaviors and habits of university undergraduate students. It was designed to determine whether undergraduate students could be grouped based on their self-reported study behaviors and if any grouping system could be determined, whether group membership was related to students’ academic achievement. A total of 152 undergraduate students voluntarily participated in the current study by completing the Study Behavior Inventory instrument. All participants were enrolled in fall semester of 2010 at Florida International University. The Q factor analysis technique using principal components extraction and a varimax rotation was used in order to examine the participants in relation to each other and to detect a pattern of intercorrelations among participants based on their self-reported study behaviors. The Q factor analysis yielded a two factor structure representing two distinct student types among participants regarding their study behaviors. The first student type (i.e., Factor 1) describes proactive learners who organize both their study materials and study time well. Type 1 students are labeled “Proactive Learners with Well-Organized Study Behaviors”. The second type (i.e., Factor 2) represents students who are poorly organized as well as being very likely to procrastinate. Type 2 students are labeled Disorganized Procrastinators. Hierarchical linear regression was employed to examine the relationship between student type and academic achievement as measured by current grade point averages (GPAs). The results showed significant differences in GPAs between Type 1 and Type 2 students at the .05 significance level. Furthermore, student type was found to be a significant predictor of academic achievement beyond and above students’ attribute variables including sex, age, major, and enrollment status. The study has several implications for educational researchers, practitioners, and policy makers in terms of improving college students' learning behaviors and outcomes.