The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
On tests and indices for evaluating structural models
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Alternative Ways of Assessing Model Fit
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992) · Sociological Methods & Research · doi:10.1177/0049124192021002005 · Cited by 27,200
Comparative fit indexes in structural models.
Bentler, P. M. (1990) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238 · Cited by 25,266
Self-citationPrinciples and practice in reporting structural equation analyses.
McDonald, R. P., & Ho, M.-H. R. (2002) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.7.1.64 · Cited by 4,734
Research works printed but not linked: 15
- Bentler, P. M. (in press). EQS 6 structural equations program manual. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software.
- Bentler, 1980, Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures, Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588, 10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588 · DOI · Paper page
- Browne, 2002, When fit indices and residuals are incompatible, Psychological Methods, 7, 403, 10.1037/1082-989X.7.4.403 · DOI · Paper page
- Curran, 1996, The robustness of test statistics to nonnormality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis, Psychological Methods, 1, 16, 10.1037/1082-989X.1.1.16 · DOI · Paper page
- Hu, 1992, Can test statistics in covariance structure analysis be trusted?, Psychological Bulletin, 112, 351, 10.1037/0033-2909.112.2.351 · DOI
- Jöreskog, 1982, Recent developments in structural equation modeling, Journal of Marketing Research, 19, 404, 10.2307/3151714 · DOI
- Lee, 1995, A two-stage estimation of structural equation models with continuous and polytomous variables, British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 48, 339, 10.1111/j.2044-8317.1995.tb01067.x · DOI
- MacCallum, 2003, Working with imperfect models, Multivariate Behavioral Research, 38, 113, 10.1207/S15327906MBR3801_5 · DOI
- MacCallum, 1992, Model modification in covariance structure analysis: The problem of capitalization on chance, Psychological Bulletin, 111, 490, 10.1037/0033-2909.111.3.490 · DOI · Paper page
- Maydeu-Olivares, 2006, A cautionary note on using G2(dif) to assess relative model fit in categorical data analysis, Multivariate Behavioral Research, 41, 55, 10.1207/s15327906mbr4101_4 · DOI
- Schilling, 2005, High-dimensional maximum marginal likelihood item factor analysis by adaptive quadrature, Psychometrika, 70, 1, 10.1007/s11336-003-1141-x · DOI
- Stout, 1990, A new item response theory modeling approach with applications to unidimensionality assessment and ability estimation, Psychometrika, 55, 293, 10.1007/BF02295289 · DOI
- Yuan, 2004, On chi-square difference and z-tests in mean and covariance structure analysis when the base model is misspecified, Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64, 737, 10.1177/0013164404264853 · DOI
- Yuan, K.-H., & Bentler, P. M. (in press-a). Structural equation modeling. In C. R. Rao & S. Sinharay (Eds.), Handbook of statistics: Psychometrics. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
- Yuan, K.-H., & Bentler, P. M. (in press-b). Robust procedures in structural equation modeling. In S.-Y. Lee (Ed.). Handbook of structural equation models. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Cited by
Putnick, D. L., & Bornstein, M. H. (2016) · Developmental Review · doi:10.1016/j.dr.2016.06.004 · Cited by 4,369
“…CFI (Meade et al., 2008; Rutkowski & Svetina, 2014) or the use of other alternative fit indices (e.g., ΔRMSEA, ΔSRMR; Chen, 2007; Meade et al., 2008), and some question the use of alternative fit indices entirely because of their lack of precision (Barrett, 2007; Bentler, 2007; Fan & Sivo, 2009).”
BackgroundReporting practices in confirmatory factor analysis: an overview and some recommendations
Jackson, D. L., Gillaspy, J. A., & Purc-Stephenson, R. (2009) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/a0014694 · Cited by 2,242
Chen, F., Curran, P. J., Bollen, K. A., Kirby, J., & Paxton, P. (2008) · Sociological Methods & Research · doi:10.1177/0049124108314720 · Cited by 1,538
Developmental cognitive neuroscience using latent change score models: A tutorial and applications
Kievit, R. A., Brandmaier, A. M., Ziegler, G., van Harmelen, A.-L., de Mooij, S. M. M., Moutoussis, M., Goodyer, I. M., Bullmore, E., Jones, P. B., Fonagy, P., et al. (2018) · Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience · doi:10.1016/j.dcn.2017.11.007 · Cited by 516
Beyond sacrificial harm: a two-dimensional model of utilitarian psychology
Kahane, G., Everett, J. A. C., Earp, B. D., Caviola, L., Faber, N. S., Crockett, M. J., & Savulescu, J. (2018) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/rev0000093 · Cited by 434
Metadata
- Authors
- Bentler, P. M.
- Venue
- Personality and Individual Differences
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2007-05
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 825-829
- ISSN
- 0191-8869 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2006213046
- Cited by
- 852
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 16.31
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: On tests and indices for evaluating structural models. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.paid.2006.09.024
- The paper
- Bentler, P. M. (2007). On tests and indices for evaluating structural models. Personality and Individual Differences. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.09.024
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
