Cited by 5,512Psychometric Methodologies and TestingStatistical Distribution Estimation and ApplicationsStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference

The robustness of test statistics to nonnormality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis.

Curran, Patrick J., West, Stephen G., Finch, John F.·1996·Psychological Methods

Abstract

Monte Carlo computer simulations were used to investigate the performance of three X 2 test statistics in confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Normal theory maximum likelihood)~2 (ML), Browne's asymptotic distribution free X 2 (ADF), and the Satorra-Bentler rescaled X 2 (SB) were examined under varying conditions of sample size, model specification, and multivariate distribution. For properly specified models, ML and SB showed no evidence of bias under normal distributions across all sample sizes, whereas ADF was biased at all but the largest sample sizes. ML was increasingly overestimated with increasing nonnormality, but both SB (at all sample sizes) and ADF (only at large sample sizes) showed no evidence of bias. For misspecified models, ML was again inflated with increasing nonnormality, but both SB and ADF were underestimated with increasing nonnormality. It appears that the power of the SB and ADF test statistics to detect a model misspecification is attenuated given nonnormally distributed data. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) has become an increasingly popular method of investigating the structure of data sets in psychology. In contrast to traditional exploratory factor analysis that does not place strong a priori restrictions on the structure of the model being tested, CFA requires the investigator to specify both the number of factors

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/1082-989x.1.1.16

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Curran, P. J., West, S. G., & Finch, J. F.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
  • Arizona State University (US)
  • Texas A&M University (US)
Venue
Psychological Methods
Published
1996-03
Volume
1
Issue
1
Pages
16-29
ISSN
  • 1082-989X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1463
OpenAlex
W1968524945
Cited by
5,512
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 432 · 2025: 392 · 2024: 410 · 2023: 404 · 2022: 383 · 2021: 361 · 2020: 333 · 2019: 270 · 2018: 295 · 2017: 273 · 2016: 237 · 2015: 242 · 2014: 251 · 2013: 218 · 2012: 179
FWCI
33.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Psychological Methods (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Distribution Estimation and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Keywords
confirmatory factor analysis, chi-square statistic, non-normality, model misspecification, robustness, sample size

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