Cited by 5,282Psychometric Methodologies and TestingStatistical Methods and Bayesian InferenceStatistical Distribution Estimation and Applications

A scaled difference chi-square test statistic for moment structure analysis

Open access
Satorra, Albert, Bentler, Peter M.·2001·Psychometrika

Abstract

A family of scaling corrections aimed to improve the chi-square approximation of goodness-of-fit test statistics in small samples, large models, and nonnormal data was proposed in Satorra and Bentler (1994). For structural equations models, Satorra-Bentler's (SB) scaling corrections are available in standard computer software. Often, however, the interest is not on the overall fit of a model, but on a test of the restrictions that a null model say M 0 implies on a less restricted one M 1 . If T 0 and T 1 denote the goodness-of-fit test statistics associated to M 0 and M 1 , respectively, then typically the difference T d = T 0 − T 1 is used as a chi-square test statistic with degrees of freedom equal to the difference on the number of independent parameters estimated under the models M 0 and M 1 . As in the case of the goodness-of-fit test, it is of interest to scale the statistic T d in order to improve its chi-square approximation in realistic, that is, nonasymptotic and nonormal, applications. In a recent paper, Satorra (2000) shows that the difference between two SB scaled test statistics for overall model fit does not yield the correct SB scaled difference test statistic. Satorra developed an expression that permits scaling the difference test statistic, but his formula has some practical limitations, since it requires heavy computations that are not available in standard computer software. The purpose of the present paper is to provide an easy way to compute the scaled difference chi-square statistic from the scaled goodness-of-fit test statistics of models M 0 and M 1 . A Monte Carlo study is provided to illustrate the performance of the competing statistics.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/bf02296192

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Satorra, A., & Bentler, P. M.
Affiliations
  • Universitat Pompeu Fabra (ES)
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
Corresponding author
Satorra, Albert
Venue
Psychometrika
Published
2001-12
Volume
66
Issue
4
Pages
507-514
ISSN
  • 0033-3123 (ISSN-L)
  • 1860-0980
OpenAlex
W3021353408
Cited by
5,282
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 349 · 2025: 328 · 2024: 290 · 2023: 296 · 2022: 301 · 2021: 369 · 2020: 318 · 2019: 331 · 2018: 337 · 2017: 295 · 2016: 294 · 2015: 277 · 2014: 268 · 2013: 269 · 2012: 206
FWCI
15.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychometrika (publishedVersion)
  • SSRN Electronic Journal (acceptedVersion)
  • Repositori digital de la UPF (Universitat Pompeu Fabra) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Distribution Estimation and Applications
Keywords
structural equation modeling, nested model comparison, non-normal data, small sample inference, Monte Carlo simulation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review