Structural Equation Modeling : Present and Future. Festschrift in honor of Karl Joreskog

By H. Toyoda, Yasuo Nishizaki. 2001

123 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

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

Relating Latent Change Score and Continuous Time Models (2015, background): “Common examples include autoregressive, crosslagged, or latent change score (LCS) models (e.g., Du Toit & Browne, 2001; Jöreskog, 1970; Jöreskog & Sörbom, 1977; McArdle, 2001, 2009; McArdle & Hamagami, 2004).”
Riskier Tests of the Validity of the Bifactor Model of Psychopathology (2019, background): “…a specific factor should show high convergent validity and thus be characterized by appreciable and statistically significant factor loadings, thereby increasing the likelihood that the specific factor will be replicable across studies (Hancock & Mueller, 2001; Rodriguez, Reise, & Haviland, 2016).”
Developing and Validating Field Measurement Scales for Absorptive Capacity and Experienced Community of Practice (2009, methodology): “Coefficient H is “the squared correlation between the latent construct and the optimum linear composite formed from the measured indicators” (Hancock & Mueller, 2001, p. 203).”
A Note on Sample Size and Solution Propriety for Confirmatory Factor Analytic Models (2013, background): “Specifically, Gagné and Hancock varied p/f and loading size, expressing their results in terms of ¨, as well as another index, H (Hancock & Mueller, 2001), which is a maximal reliability estimate (see Gagné & Hancock for formulas for ¨ and H and a comparative analysis).”