Introducing Lisrel: A Guide for the Uninitiated
By Adamantios Diamantopoulos, Judy A. Siguaw. 2000
1,041 citations recorded by the source corpus.
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e2e95b06e209681e7863f8fe64d4357b547a3b60
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
- Trude Havik
- Songshan (Sam) Huang
- Cathy H. C. Hsu
- Sigrun K. Ertesvåg
- Hea Jun Yoon
- E. Bru
- S. Cottrell
- Chang-Wook Jeung
Citations in the corpus
- Influence of Sociodemographics and Environmental Attitudes on General Responsible Environmental Behavior among Recreational Boaters (2003, methodology): “Because path coefficients from SEM are identical to regression coefficients from MR (Corral-Verdugo, 2002; Diamantopoulos & Siguaw, 2000) and SEM programs report fit indices, logic indicates its use rather than a series of MR analyses.”
- The influence of ethical leadership on trust and work engagement: An exploratory study (2014, methodology): “…discussed per scale in terms of the p-value test of close fit (where p > 0.05 indicates good model fit) and the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) (where RMSEA 0.08 indicates a reasonable model fit and RMSEA 0.05 indicates a good fit of the data) (Diamantopoulos & Siguaw, 2000).”
- Assessing Reasons for School Non-attendance (2015, background): “Finally, the values for the standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) range from 0 to 1.0, with good-fitting models obtaining values ≤ 0.05 (Byrne, 1998; Diamantopoulos & Siguaw, 2000); however, values as high as 0.08 are deemed acceptable (Hu & Bentler, 1999).”
- An Extension of the Theory of Planned Behavior Model for Tourists (2012, methodology): “The cutoff point of c2/df was set at 3:1 (Jöreskog & Sörbom, 1989), and the cutoff points of RMSEA, standardized RMR, GFI, NFI, and CFI were .08, .05, .90, .90, .90, respectively (Byrne, 1998; Diamantopoulos & Siguaw, 2000).”
- Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Test of Gross Motor Development-2 (2010, methodology): “The CN value should be greater than 200 to indicate an adequate representation of the data (Diamantopoulos & Siguaw, 2000).”