Factor analysis and scale revision.

By S. Reise, N. Waller, A. L. Comrey. Psychological Assessment, 2000

900 citations recorded by the source corpus.

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

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f200fbd54df1219857944aa8a02cb42b6d4e3eaa

How researchers see this paper

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

In Clinical Psychology

In Computer Networks and Communications

In Management Science and Operations Research

Citations in the corpus

The Development and Evaluation of the Academic Entitlement Questionnaire (2011, methodology): “Our method for studying the structure of the items was firmly rooted in best measurement practice (Reise et al., 2000; Reise et al., 2010).”
The role of the bifactor model in resolving dimensionality issues in health outcomes measures (2007, positive): “To set a framework for the subsequent section on dimensionality assessment, we begin with a discussion of the hierarchical nature of constructs [17, 18].”
Assessing the Perceived Restorative Qualities of Vacation Destinations (2013, background): “Nine items were eliminated from the step either because of having factor loadings lower than 0.50 or items cross loaded on more than one factor (Reise, Waller, and Comrey 2000).”
The five‐factor personality inventory: cross‐cultural generalizability across 13 countries (2003, background): “Parallel analysis shows at which point additionally extracted factors in the real data would explain less variance than those extracted in simulated random data and, thus, at which point it would no longer make sense retaining them (Reise et al., 2000).”
The Tinnitus Functional Index: Development of a New Clinical Measure for Chronic, Intrusive Tinnitus (2012, background): “rather than underextraction of factors (e.g., Wood et al. 1996; Reise et al. 2000; Tabachnick & Fidell 2001).”
Development of A Promis Item Bank to Measure Pain Interference (2010, background): “Health outcomes are conceptually complex and responses to items of health outcome measures rarely, if ever, meet a strictly interpreted unidimensionality assumption [18,43,44].”
Reading Motivation: Multidimensional and Indeterminate (2004, background): “Although a thorough discussion of scale development is beyond the scope of this article, detailed recommendations are outlined in Clark and Watson (1995), Comrey and Lee (1992), Floyd and Widaman (1995), Gorsuch (1997), Reise, Waller, and Comrey (2000), and Smith and McCarthy (1995).”
Commentary on Coefficient Alpha: A Cautionary Tale (2009, background): “Many psychometricians argue that it would be preferable if the structure underlying items were more consistent with a hierarchical model or its more general form, a bifactor model, than a unidimensional model (e.g., Gerbing & Anderson, 1988; Humphreys, 1985; McDonald, 1999; Reise et al., 2000; Roz”
Ten Steps in Scale Development and Reporting: A Guide for Researchers (2018, methodology): “The scree test is considered more accurate than the eigenvalue rule (McCrosky & Young, 1979; Pett et al., 2003; Preacher & MacCallum, 2003; Reise et al., 2000).”
In Search of Underlying Dimensions: The Use (and Abuse) of Factor Analysis in Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin (2002, methodology): “There is no simple answer to the problem of determining the number of factors to extract, given that available computer programs do not provide results for random data sets as described by Reise et al. (2000). The default method of extracting factors with eigenvalues ≥ 1.”