Book Review: Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analysis: Understanding Concepts and Applications

By Sara J. Finney. 2007

1,108 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Computer Networks and Communications, Management Science and Operations Research, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/50ec34997da06756d526e5d64cd236b507024897

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Computer Networks and Communications

In Management Science and Operations Research

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Development of brand equity: evaluation of four alternative models (2010, neutral): “Discount store: x2 ¼ 52.032; df ¼ 43; RMR ¼ 0.034; GFI ¼ 0.964; CFI ¼ 0.991; TLI ¼ 0.987; AGFI ¼ 0.938 RMSEA ¼ 0.026. associations that had loadings greater than 0.40 were not a cut-off value (Thompson, 2004).”
Progress Toward Construct Validation of the Sports Mental Toughness Questionnaire (SMTQ) (2009, methodology): “Higher-order factor analysis takes into account the reality of correlated factors by allowing for the extraction of variance accounted for by the general factor (Thompson, 2004).”
Factor Analysis in Counseling Psychology Research, Training, and Practice (2006, methodology): “As such, post hoc modifications need to be theoretically defensible and clearly indicated (Kahn, 2005; Thompson, 2004).”
Using a New Learning Environment Questionnaire for Reflection in Teacher Action Research (2012, methodology): “In choosing 0.40 as the cut-off value for factor loadings, we followed the recommendation of Thompson (2004); Stevens (1992) and Field (2005).”
Student Characteristics and Motivation in Rural High Schools (2009, methodology): “According to Thompson (2004), “’the bootstrap’ is an elegant computer-intensive internal replicability analysis” that “can be conceptualized as a method of using the sample data in such a manner that the sample data are themselves used to estimate the distribution of a large number of sample…”
The Structural Relationships Between Optimism and Innovative Behavior: Understanding Potential Antecedents and Mediating Effects (2011, methodology): “It is broadly acknowledged that confirmatory factor analysis is used to support the evidence of construct-related validity in theory-based instrument construction (Boman, Curtis, Furlong, & Smith, 2006; Hanna, Shevlin, & Dempster, 2008; Myers, Stein, & Aarons, 2002; Thompson, 2004).”
The Reliability and Validity of Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory Scores in Academically Talented Adolescents (2007, methodology): “As Thompson (2004) recommended, goodness of fit was assessed using several criteria, including the Satorra–Bentler scaled w2 (Satorra & Bentler, 1994), which corrects for nonnormality in the data, the w2 to degrees of freedom ratio, the comparative fit index (CFI), the standardized root mean square…”
Congeneric and (Essentially) Tau-Equivalent Estimates of Score Reliability (2006, methodology): “(p. 591) Although the use of the χ2 statistic alone for the purpose of determining model fit is questionable, χ2 statistics can be of use in comparing the fits of nested models in which the sample size is held constant across models (Thompson, 2004).”
Academic Optimism of Schools: A Force for Student Achievement (2006, background): “The chi-square statistic, however, is strongly influenced by sample size (Bentler & Bonnett, 1980; Thompson, 2004).”
Teacher-Student Support, Effortful Engagement, and Achievement: A 3-Year Longitudinal Study. (2008, methodology): “We applied a cross-validation approach to examine the underlying structure because of the unclear factor structure of the measure (B. Thompson, 2004).”
Factor Analysis in Counseling Research and Practice (2013, background): “For detailed discussions, counselors and researchers have numerous generally accessible texts to consult (e.g., Child, 2006; Goldberg & Velicer, 2006; Kline, 1994; Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994; Pett, Lackey, & Sullivan, 2003; Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007; Thompson, 2004).”
Green events, value perceptions, and the role of consumer involvement in festival design and performance (2015, methodology): “To test and ensure that the right number of factors was retained, we performed parallel analysis as the literature suggests (Thompson, 2004).”
Reporting practices in confirmatory factor analysis: an overview and some recommendations. (2009, background): “As noted by Thompson (2004), “It makes little sense to relate constructs within an SEM model if the factors specified as part of the model are not worthy of further attention” (p. 110).”
Matrix Summaries Improve Research Reports: Secondary Analyses Using Published Literature (2009, methodology): “Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and SEM are common methods for examining construct validity (Kline, 2005; Thompson, 2004).”
A More Fine-Grained Measure of Students' Acceptance of Evolution: Development of the Inventory of Student Evolution Acceptance—I-SEA (2012, methodology): “We based these decisions on our consultation of the literature (Byrne, 2006; Kline, 2004; Tabachnick & Fidell, 2000; Thompson, 2005) and our desire to determine how our items loaded on a theoretically driven number of components (e.g. along our three subscales).”
Validity of Three School Climate Scales to Assess Bullying, Aggressive Attitudes, and Help Seeking (2009, methodology): “EFA is a useful technique for uncovering the relationships among a set of variables with the goal to better understand the underlying structure of those variables in terms of their unifying themes (Thompson, 2004).”
Development and Psychometric Properties of the Math and Me Survey (2011, methodology): “…for retaining items were as follows: (a) pattern coefficient was at least .4 (a criterion frequently used to determine salience of variables; Thompson, 2004), (b) pattern coefficients for nonrelevant factors were less than .3, and (c) pattern coefficients for nonrelevant factors were at…”