A Note on Estimating the Jöreskog-Yang Model for Latent Variable Interaction Using LISREL 8.3

By James Algina, B. Moulder. 2001

172 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/dd8ddee918b78138fb8da00ede3f5bbb58072424

How researchers see this paper

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

In Statistics and Probability

Citations in the corpus

Integrating Moderation and Mediation (2016, methodology): “Yet in another example, Algina and Moulder (2001) used mean centering of the indicator variables to calculate the product terms and further simplified the Jöreskog and Yang (1996) approach.”
Latent Variable Interaction Modeling (2002, methodology): “If the LISREL 8.30 program doesn’t converge, then the deviation score approach (Algina & Moulder, 2001), larger sample sizes, start values, or more iterations may be necessary (IT=1000).”
Structural Equation Models of Latent Interactions: Clarification of Orthogonalizing and Double-Mean-Centering Strategies (2010, background): “Marsh, Wen, and Hau (2004, 2006) reviewed approaches leading to what they referred to as the mean-centered constrained approach based on Algina and Moulder’s (2001) extension of earlier models by Jöreskog and Yang (1996). Although related to earlier work by Jaccard and Wan (1995), Jöreskog and Yang ”
12 Structural Equation Modeling in Management Research: A Guide for Improved Analysis (2009, methodology): “Wall and Amemiya (2001) derived a generalized appended product indicator (GAPI) model that is similar to the Algina and Moulder (2001) approach but makes no distributional assumptions concerning the variables in the model, which in turn lessens the need for some of the nonlinear constraints.”
Structural Equation Models of Latent Interactions: An Appropriate Standardized Solution and Its Scale-Free Properties (2010, methodology): “Suppose that Ÿ1 and Ÿ2 are mean-centered variables so as to have zero means (e.g., Algina & Moulder, 2001; Jaccard & Wan, 1995; Jöreskog & Yang, 1996; Kenny & Judd, 1984; Klein & Muthén, 2007; Marsh et al., 2004; Moulder & Algina, 2002; Ping, 1996a, 1996b; SchermellehEngel, Klein, & Moosbrugger,…”
Brand awareness in business markets: When is it related to firm performance? (2010, methodology): “Following Algina and Moulder (2001) and in accordance with traditional regression approaches to analyzing interactions, we mean-centered all indicators before creating the product indicators to facilitate our interpretation of the results.”
Understanding and Using Mediators and Moderators (2008, background): “Discussions on the SEM to model moderators can be found in Algina and Moulder (2001), Bollen and Paxton (1998), Jacard and Wen (1995), Kenny and Judd (1984), Marsh et al. (2004), Moulder and Algina (2002), Ping (1996), Schermelleh-Engel et al. (1998), Schumacker (2002) and Schumacker and…”
A Comparison of Strategies for Forming Product Indicators for Unequal Numbers of Items in Structural Equation Models of Latent Interactions (2013, methodology): “…was heuristic, stimulating many published studies that presented alternative approaches to the use of PIs in estimating latent interactions (e.g., Algina & Moulder, 2001; Coenders, Batista-Foguet, & Saris, 2008; Hayduk, 1987; Jaccard & Wan, 1995; Jöreskog, 1998; Marsh et al., 2004; Ping, 1996;…”
Comparison of Methods for Estimating and Testing Latent Variable Interactions (2002, methodology): “In a previous study, Algina and Moulder (2001) found that increases in observed variable means reduced the likelihood of convergence using the Jöreskog–Yang procedure.”
Structural equation modeling: strengths, limitations, and misconceptions. (2005, background): “(b) Convergence problems have been observed with some procedures (e.g., Algina & Moulder 2001, Lee et al. 2004).”
Estimating Latent Variable Interactions with the Unconstrained Approach: A Comparison of Methods to Form Product Indicators for Large, Unequal Numbers of Items (2011, methodology): “Also, we only simulated data sets with sample sizes above the minimum recommended by previous studies (Algina & Moulder, 2001; Schumacker, 2002), but an examination of small sample sizes would provide interesting insight about the latent interaction approaches, especially because the median sample…”
Accuracy of Parameter Estimates and Confidence Intervals in Moderated Mediation Models (2017, background): “Hayduk (1987), Jaccard and Wan (1995), Jöreskog and Yang (1996), and Algina and Moulder (2001) suggested further 748 Organizational Research Methods 20(4)”
Unconstrained Structural Equation Models of Latent Interactions: Contrasting Residual- and Mean-Centered Approaches (2007, methodology): “…and Hau (2004, 2006) reviewed approaches leading to what they referred to as the mean-centered constrained approach based on the traditional constrained approach (Algina & Moulder, 2001; Jöreskog & Yang, 1996; Kenny & Judd, 1984), as well as other latent and nonlatent approaches to the problem.”
Advanced Nonlinear Latent Variable Modeling: Distribution Analytic LMS and QML Estimators of Interaction and Quadratic Effects (2011, methodology): “This PI approach has received subsequent development, particularly as reflected in contributions by Jöreskog and Yang (1996), Algina and Moulder (2001), Wall and Amemiya (2001), and Marsh, Wen, and Hau (2004). Nonlinear constraints.”
Generalized Structured Component Analysis with Latent Interactions (2010, methodology): “In practice, a simple approach to accommodating latent interactions is to obtain product indicators of observed variables for interacting latent variables, and subsequently to use them as indicators for latent interactions (e.g., Algina & Moulder, 2001; Chin, Marcolin, & Newsted, 1996).”
On the Merits of Orthogonalizing Powered and Product Terms: Implications for Modeling Interactions Among Latent Variables (2006, methodology): “(2004), the only generally accessible procedures involved complex nonlinear constraints such as those described in Algina and Moulder (2001), Jaccard and Wan (1995), Jöreskog and Yang (1996), Schumacker and Marcoulides (1998), and Wall and Amemiya (2001). Like our orthogonalizing method, Marsh et al”