A Monte Carlo Study Investigating the Impact of Item Parceling on Measures of Fit in Confirmatory Factor Analysis

By F. Nasser, J. Wisenbaker. 2003

293 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Information Systems and Management, Management Science and Operations Research, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a6c905fdbad965833cfc54c816682663d3f652b9

How researchers see this paper

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

In Information Systems and Management

In Management Science and Operations Research

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

Citations in the corpus

Peering into the “Magnum Mysterium” of Culture (2009, methodology): “Given that individual items tend to have low reliabilities and often violate assumptions of multivariate normality, we used the more common parceling method where three-item clusters or “parcels” are used as indicators instead of individual items (Bandalos, 2002; Nasser & Wisenbaker, 2003).”
An Empirical Evaluation of the Use of Fixed Cutoff Points in RMSEA Test Statistic in Structural Equation Models (2008, methodology): “We reviewed five years of key journals within several areas of social science research to catalog prototypical model types of SEM applications (see Paxton et al. [2001], Curran et al.”
Assessing Fit in Ordinal Factor Analysis Models: SRMR vs. RMSEA (2020, methodology): “…has examined the performance of point estimates, confidence intervals and tests of close fit using the RMSEA (Curran, Bollen, Chen, Paxton, & Kirby, 2003; Fan, Thompson, & Wang, 1999; Hu & Bentler, 1998; Kenny et al., 2015; Kenny & McCoach, 2003; Nasser & Wisenbaker, 2003; Nevitt & Hancock, 2000).”
Cross-National Adolescent Multidimensional Life Satisfaction Reports: Analyses of Mean Scores and Response Style Differences (2008, methodology): “Although there is no uniform method to item parceling (Nasser and Wisenbaker, 2003), some constraints were placed on how the items were parceled, which have been applied in previous research with the MSLSS (Gilman et al.”
Why the Items versus Parcels Controversy Needn’t Be One (2013, background): “With just two parceled indicators per construct, locally underidentified measurement spaces can result in high rates of nonconvergence and improper solutions (Nasser & Wisenbaker, 2003; unless equality constraints on the loadings are imposed; Little et al., 1999).”
Psychometric Evaluation of a Receptive Vocabulary Test for Greek Elementary Students (2011, methodology): “To overcome this problem, we used item parceling (Abu-Alhija & Wisenbaker, 2006; Bandalos, 2002; Kisthton & Widaman, 1994; Nasser & Wisenbaker, 2003).”
When Do Employees Cyberloaf? An Interactionist Perspective Examining Personality, Justice, and Empowerment (2016, methodology): “We conducted CFAs using " parcels " instead of individual items as indicators, since individual items tend to have low reliabilities and often violate assumptions of multivariate normality (Bandalos, 2002; Nasser & Wisenbake, 2003).”
Brand anthropomorphism: Conceptualization, measurement, and impact on brand personality and loyalty (2015, methodology): “Each latent construct was measured by a single composite indicator that served as observed variable, according to an itemparceling procedure that has been recommended to obtain more parsimonious and precise structural estimates (Bandalos, 2002) and a better model fit (Nasser and Wisenbaker, 2003).”
Item Parceling in Structural Equation Modeling: A Primer (2008, background): “0) when parceled (see Nasser & Wisenbaker, 2003 , for a similar report).”
Problems With Item Parceling for Confirmatory Factor Analytic Tests of Measurement Invariance (2006, methodology): “These methods have been discussed at length in previous literature (e.g., Bandalos, 2002; Bandalos & Finney, 2001; Landis, Beal, & Tesluk, 2000; Little et al., 2002; Nasser & Wisenbaker, 2003; Rogers & Schmitt, 2004), and a full discussion is beyond the scope of this study.”
A Monte Carlo Study Investigating the Impact of Item Parceling Strategies on Parameter Estimates and Their Standard Errors in CFA (2006, methodology): “The basic confirmatory factor analytic models investigated were generated on the basis of five fully crossed design factors also considered in Nasser and Wisenbaker (2003) for evaluating the impact of parceling on measures of model fit.”
Delighting the Customer: Creativity-Oriented High-Performance Work Systems, Frontline Employee Creative Performance, and Customer Satisfaction (2019, methodology): “Given the relatively small sample size in relation to the number of items, we adopted item-parceling procedures to reach a more adequate ratio (Nasser & Wisenbaker, 2003).”
A Beginner's Guide to Partial Least Squares Analysis (2004, result): “For example, the work of Marsh, Hau, Balla, and Grayson (1998) gave an indication that more indicators per latent variable lead to fewer improper solutions and more stable results, and similar findings were generated by Nasser and Wisenbaker (2003).”
Voluntary Retirement and Organizational Turnover Intentions: The Differential Associations with Work and Non-Work Commitment Constructs (2008, background): “The four work commitment scales contained a relatively large number of items; thus, the individual items from each scale were parceled such that each construct had three indicators (Nasser and Wisenbaker 2003).”