The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Estimating, testing, and comparing specific effects in structural equation models: The phantom model approach.
Abstract
The phantom model approach for estimating, testing, and comparing specific effects within structural equation models (SEMs) is presented. The rationale underlying this novel method consists in representing the specific effect to be assessed as a total effect within a separate latent variable model, the phantom model that is added to the main model. The following favorable features characterize the method: (a) It enables the estimation, testing, and comparison of arbitrary specific effects for recursive and nonrecursive models with latent and manifest variables; (b) it enables the bootstrapping of confidence intervals; and (c) it can be applied with all standard SEM programs permitting latent variables, the specification of equality constraints, and the bootstrapping of total effects. These features along with the fact that no manipulation of matrices and formulas is required make the approach particularly suitable for applied researchers. The method is illustrated by means of 3 examples with real data sets.
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
Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations.
Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. (2002) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.7.4.422 · Cited by 11,335
Confidence Limits for the Indirect Effect: Distribution of the Product and Resampling Methods
MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., & Williams, J. (2004) · Multivariate Behavioral Research · doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr3901_4 · Cited by 7,806
Reporting 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
Cited by
Yuan, S., & Lou, C. (2020) · Journal of Interactive Advertising · doi:10.1080/15252019.2020.1769514 · Cited by 543
Hur, W.-M., Kim, H., & Woo, J. (2014) · Journal of Business Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10551-013-1910-0 · Cited by 538
Ullman, J. B., & Bentler, P. M. (2012) · Handbook of Psychology, Second Edition · doi:10.1002/9781118133880.hop202023 · Cited by 330
Maruskin, L. A., Thrash, T. M., & Elliot, A. J. (2012) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0028117 · Cited by 121
Liu, J., Bartholomew, K., & Chung, P.-K. (2017) · School Mental Health · doi:10.1007/s12310-017-9223-6 · Cited by 81
Metadata
- Authors
- Macho, S., & Ledermann, T.
- Venue
- Psychological Methods
- Published
- 2011
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 34-43
- ISSN
- 1082-989X (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1463
- OpenAlex
- W2083825606
- Cited by
- 401
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 23.41
- 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
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.
