Methodological Measurement Fruitfulness of Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling (ESEM): New Approaches to Key Substantive Issues in Motivation and Engagement

被引:158
作者
Marsh, Herbert W. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Liem, Gregory Arief D. [2 ]
Martin, Andrew J. [2 ]
Morin, Alexandre J. S. [2 ]
Nagengast, Benjamin
机构
[1] Univ Oxford, Dept Educ, Oxford OX2 6PY, England
[2] Univ Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia
[3] King Saud Univ, Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia
关键词
Factor analysis; Motivation and Engagement; measurement invariance; differential item functioning; STUDENT MOTIVATION; FIT INDEXES; INVARIANCE; VARIABLES; ROTATION; CFA;
D O I
10.1177/0734282911406657
中图分类号
G44 [教育心理学];
学科分类号
0402 ; 040202 ;
摘要
The most popular measures of multidimensional constructs typically fail to meet standards of good measurement: goodness of fit, measurement invariance, lack of differential item functioning, and well-differentiated factors that are not so highly correlated as to detract from their discriminant validity. Part of the problem, the authors argue, is undue reliance on overly restrictive independent cluster models of confirmatory factor analysis (ICM-CFA) in which each item loads on one, and only one, factor. Here the authors demonstrate exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM), an integration of the best aspects of CFA and traditional exploratory factor analyses (EFA). On the basis of responses to the 11-factor Motivation and Engagement Scale (n = 7,420, M(age) = 14.22), we demonstrate that ESEM fits the data much better and results in substantially more differentiated (less correlated) factors than corresponding CFA models. Guided by a 13-model taxonomy of ESEM full-measurement (mean structure) invariance, the authors then demonstrate invariance of factor loadings, item intercepts, item uniquenesses, and factor variances-covariances, across gender and over time. ESEM has broad applicability to other areas of research that cannot be appropriately addressed with either traditional EFA or CFA and should become a standard tool for use in psychometric tests of psychological assessment instruments.
引用
收藏
页码:322 / 346
页数:25
相关论文
共 26 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2008, MPLUS USERS GUIDE
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2005, PSYCHOMETRICS FESTSC
[3]  
[Anonymous], 1979, ADV FACTOR ANAL STRU
[4]  
Asparouhov T., 2009, STRUCTURAL EQUATION
[5]   On the performance of maximum likelihood versus means and variance adjusted weighted least squares estimation in CFA [J].
Beauducel, A ;
Herzberg, PY .
STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING-A MULTIDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL, 2006, 13 (02) :186-203
[6]   Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance [J].
Chen, Fang Fang .
STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING-A MULTIDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL, 2007, 14 (03) :464-504
[7]   The effects of model parsimony and sampling error on the fit of structural equation models [J].
Cheung, GW ;
Rensvold, RB .
ORGANIZATIONAL RESEARCH METHODS, 2001, 4 (03) :236-264
[8]   The impact of categorization with confirmatory factor analysis [J].
DiStefano, C .
STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING-A MULTIDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL, 2002, 9 (03) :327-346
[10]   Factor analysis in the development and refinement of clinical assessment instruments [J].
Floyd, FJ ;
Widaman, KF .
PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT, 1995, 7 (03) :286-299