The DOI matches its Crossref record; 69 of the 70 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Rediscovery of Bifactor Measurement Models
Open accessAbstract
multidimensionality in a set of ordered categorical item responses. I begin by describing the Schmid-Leiman bifactor procedure (Schmid & Leiman, 1957), and highlight its relations with correlated-factors and second-order exploratory factor models. After describing limitations of the Schmid-Leiman, two newer methods of exploratory bifactor modeling are considered, namely, analytic bifactor (Jennrich & Bentler, 2011) and target bifactor rotations (Reise, Moore, & Maydeu-Olivares, 2011). In section two, I discuss limited and full-information estimation approaches to confirmatory bifactor models that have emerged from the item response theory and factor analysis traditions, respectively. Comparison of the confirmatory bifactor model to alternative nested confirmatory models and establishing parameter invariance for the general factor also are discussed. In the final section, important applications of bifactor models are reviewed. These applications demonstrate that bifactor modeling potentially provides a solid foundation for conceptualizing psychological constructs, constructing measures, and evaluating a measure's psychometric properties. However, some applications of the bifactor model may be limited due to its restrictive assumptions.
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.
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?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Model-based reliability estimates have often been proposed as an alternative measure of reliability for structural equation modeling (Brunner et al. 2012; Reise 2012; Rodriguez et al. 2016) due to the practical limitations of Cronbach’s alpha (Dunn et al. 2014; Sijtsma 2009; Yang and Green 2011).”
From Measurement Invariance of the WISC-V across a Clinical Sample of Children and Adolescents with ADHD and a Matched Control Group (2024) · cites this paper as Reise 2012
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
R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing
R Core Team (2000) · doi:10.32614/r.manuals · Cited by 355,893
EQS : structural equations program manual
Bentler, P. M. (1989) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 9,669
Test Theory: A Unified Treatment
Zwick, R., & McDonald, R. P. (2000) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2669496 · Cited by 3,641 · cited 1×
“Thus, to judge the degree to which composite scale scores are interpretable as a measure of a single common factor, we need a related index called coefficient omega hierarchical (McDonald, 1999; Zinbarg, Revelle, Yovel, & Li, 2005).”
Conventional wisdom on measurement: A structural equation perspective.
Bollen, K., & Lennox, R. (1991) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.110.2.305 · Cited by 3,618 · cited 1×
“In other words, if the data are truly unidimensional and a unidimensional latent variable measurement model is proposed to fit the data, content representativeness does not make any difference in defining the latent variable or in the value of the estimated item parameters (Bollen & Lennox, 1991).”
Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling
Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. (2009) · Structural Equation Modeling A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1080/10705510903008204 · Cited by 2,701
(1999) · Cited by 2,653
Corrections to test statistics and standard errors in covariance structure analysis.
Satorra, A., & Bentler, P. M. (1994) · Cited by 2,388
Marginal Maximum Likelihood Estimation of Item Parameters: Application of an EM Algorithm
Bock, R. D., & Aitkin, M. (1981) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02293801 · Cited by 2,339 · cited 1×
“Specifically, many applications of IRT are based on the marginal maximum likelihood (MML; Bock & Aitken, 1981) estimation method.”
Zinbarg, R. E., Revelle, W., Yovel, I., & Li, W. (2005) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/s11336-003-0974-7 · Cited by 1,439
Reise, S. P., Moore, T. M., & Haviland, M. G. (2010) · Journal of Personality Assessment · doi:10.1080/00223891.2010.496477 · Cited by 1,196 · cited 4×
“…resolving important problems in conceptualizing and measuring psychological constructs (Brunner, Nagy, & Wilhelm, 2012; Cai, Yang, & Hansen, 2011; Chen, Hayes, Carver, Laurenceau, & Zhang, 2012; Gustafsson & Aberg-Bengtsson, 2010; Reise et al., 2010; Reise, Morizot, & Hays, 2007; Thomas, 2012); 3.”
InfluentialSelf-citation
Research works printed but not linked: 13
- Bock R. D., 2003, TESTFACT 4.0 [Computer software and manual]
- Browne M. W., 2008, CEFA: Comprehensive Exploratory Factor Analysis (Version 3.02) [Computer software and manual]
- Cai L., 2011, IRTPRO: Flexible, multidimensional, multiple categorical IRT modeling.
- Cai L., 2011, IRTPRO: Flexible, multidimensional, multiple categorical IRT modeling [Computer software]
- Chen W. H., 1997, Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 22, 265, 10.2307/1165285 · DOI
- Gibbons R. D., 2008, Psychiatric Services, 59, 361, 10.1176/appi.ps.59.4.361 · DOI
- Jennrich R. I., 2012, Psychometrika.
- Jeon M., Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics.
- Muthén L. K., 2011, Mplus user's guide,
- Revelle W., 2012, Psych: Procedures for psychological, psychometric, and personality research. R package version 1.1–10
- Satorra A., 1994, Latent variable analysis: Applications for development research, 399
- Wu E. J. C., 2011, EQSIRT: A user-friendly IRT program.
- Zhang J., 1999, Psychometrika, 64, 231
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 601–700 of 1,002
Iteration of Partially Specified Target Matrices: Application to the Bi-Factor Case
Abad, F. J., García‐Garzón, E., Garrido, L. E., & Barrada, J. R. (2017) · Multivariate Behavioral Research · doi:10.1080/00273171.2017.1301244 · Cited by 24
“KEYWORDS Bi-factor rotation; exploratory factor analysis; Schmid-Leiman; target rotation The use of bi-factor analysis has dramatically increased in the last decade (e.g. Chen, West, & Sousa, 2006; Reise, 2012).”
Arrindell, W. A., Urbán, R., Carrozzino, D., Bech, P., Demetrovics, Z., & Roozen, H. G. (2017) · Psychiatry Research · doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2017.05.019 · Cited by 24
“Reise and his colleagues (2013a, p. 137) tentatively proposed a rather strict advice to evaluate omega-hierarchical values for specific factors, namely the minimum value would be greater than 0.50 and the preferred value would be closer to 0.75 (see also Reise, 2012).”
InfluentialCombining region‐ and network‐level brain‐behavior relationships in a structural equation model
Bolt, T., Prince, E., Nomi, J. S., Messinger, D., Llabre, M., & Uddin, L. (2018) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.10.007 · Cited by 24
“Though these are captured by the added covariance parameters, future applications of this approach may choose to more systematically account for these dependencies with extra path estimates, or possibly a bi-factor CFA model that models a general factor, and sub-factors within this factor (Reise, 2012; Reise et al., 2…”
Eck, M. E. V., Lameijer, C. M., & Moumni, M. E. (2018) · BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders · doi:10.1186/s12891-018-2114-7 · Cited by 24
“[50] First, we used coefficient omega hierarchical.”
BackgroundAn Examination of the Factor Structure of the Multidimensional Psychological Flexibility Inventory.
Thomas, K. N., Bardeen, J. R., Witte, T. K., Rogers, T. A., Benfer, N., & Clauss, K. (2022) · Assessment · doi:10.1177/10731911211024353 · Cited by 24
Gu, H., Wen, Z., & Fan, X. (2020) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00740 · Cited by 22
“…(a) the existence of a general factor that accounts for the shared communality by all the items; and (b) the existence of several group factors, which contribute to a common variance shared within each cluster of items, beyond that of the general factor (Reise, 2012; Gu et al., 2015, 2017a).”
BackgroundDefeat, Entrapment, and Hopelessness: Clarifying Interrelationships between Suicidogenic Constructs
Oakey‐Frost, N., Moscardini, E. H., Russell, K., Rasmussen, S. A., Cramer, R. J., & Tucker, R. P. (2022) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph191710518 · Cited by 23
“One solution that has been proposed to account for substantial evidence of possible unidimmensionality between scales and observed multidimensionality among factor solutions is an exploratory bifactor approach [39].”
BackgroundAn empirical investigation of attitudes toward waiting on the part of Northern California commuters
Mishra, G. S., Mokhtarian, P. L., & Widaman, K. F. (2014) · Travel Behaviour and Society · doi:10.1016/j.tbs.2014.09.002 · Cited by 23
Confiabilidade dos Índices Fatoriais da Wais-III Adaptada para a População Brasileira
Valentini, F., Gomes, C. M. A., Muniz, M., Mecca, T. P., Laros, J. A., & de Andrade, J. M. (2015) · Psicologia - Teoria e Prática · doi:10.15348/1980-6906/psicologia.v17n2p123-139 · Cited by 31
Azevedo, R. D. M., Roest, A. M., Carney, R. M., Denollet, J., Freedland, K. E., Grace, S. L., Hosseini, S. H., Lane, D. A., Parakh, K., Pilote, L., et al. (2016) · Health Psychology · doi:10.1037/hea0000316 · Cited by 24
Teresi, J. A., & Jones, R. N. (2016) · PubMed · Cited by 23
Arias, V. B., & Martínez, B. A. (2016) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2016.12.038 · Cited by 25
The Bifactor Model of the Junior Metacognitive Awareness Inventory (Jr. MAI)
Ning, H. K. (2017) · Current Psychology · doi:10.1007/s12144-017-9619-3 · Cited by 23
Ratelle, C. F., Duchesne, S., Guay, F., & Châteauvert, G. B. (2018) · Contemporary Educational Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2018.05.005 · Cited by 31
“This analytical strategy offers the advantage of distinguishing, within a single model, outcome variance that can be predicted by what is common to all dimensions (g-factor) from what is dimension-specific (s-factors; see Chen et al., 2006; Reise, 2012).”
BackgroundA study of polytomous IRT methods and item wording directionality effects on perceived stress items
Cole, K. L. M., Turner, R. C., & Gitchel, W. D. (2019) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2019.03.046 · Cited by 23
¿Realmente es demasiado corto? Versión breve del cuestionario de adicción a redes sociales (ARS-6)
Salas-Blas, E., Copez-Lonzoy, A. J. E., & Merino‐Soto, C. (2020) · African journal of rhetoric · doi:10.21134/haaj.v20i2.536 · Cited by 24
Shannon, S., Breslin, G., Prentice, G., & Leavey, G. (2020) · Psychiatry Research · doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113393 · Cited by 21
“Recent bi-factor approaches to CFA also permit items to correlate with a strong general factor alongside residual sub-factors (Reise, 2012), wherein sub-factors and general factors are orthogonal, and compete for explaining item covariance (Beaujean, 2015).”
Validity study using factor analyses on the Defining Issues Test-2 in undergraduate populations
Choi, Y., Han, H., Bankhead, M., & Thoma, S. J. (2020) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0238110 · Cited by 30
“The general factor assumes that all items in the measure explain one unidimensional factor as well as lower-level individual factors [21].”
BackgroundPsychometric evaluation of the mental health continuum – short form in Swedish adolescents
Söderqvist, F., & Larm, P. (2021) · Current Psychology · doi:10.1007/s12144-021-01626-6 · Cited by 23
“To further aid in the interpretation of each factor’s importance, and assessment of dimensionality, the explained common variance (ECV) was calculated as previously detailed by Reise (Reise, 2012).”
MethodInfluentialPsychometric evaluation of the Adjustment Disorder New Module-20 (ADNM-20): A multi-study analysis
Liang, L., Ben‐Ezra, M., Chan, E. W. W., Liu, H., Lavenda, O., & Hou, W. K. (2021) · Journal of Anxiety Disorders · doi:10.1016/j.janxdis.2021.102406 · Cited by 27
Moreta‐Herrera, R., López-Calle, C., Caycho‐Rodríguez, T., Guerra, C. B. C., Gallegos, M., Cervigni, M., Martino, P., Barés, I., & Calandra, M. (2021) · Death Studies · doi:10.1080/07481187.2021.1914240 · Cited by 23
“The true variance of the score of each item in a multidimensional construct is related to the variance of the total score and the variance of the items’ specific scores (Reise, 2012).”
BackgroundReisenzein, R., Hildebrandt, A., & Weber, H. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108264822.009 · Cited by 26
Scholz, D. D., Hilbig, B. E., Thielmann, I., Moshagen, M., & Zettler, I. (2022) · Journal of Personality · doi:10.1111/jopy.12708 · Cited by 25
The Chinese version of the Digital Stress Scale: Evaluation of psychometric properties
Xie, P., Mu, W., Li, Y., Li, X., & Wang, Y. (2022) · Current Psychology · doi:10.1007/s12144-022-03156-1 · Cited by 26
“The orthogonal rotation allows for easier interpretation of how S-factors relate to observed items above and beyond the G-factor (Reise, 2012; Reise et al., 2010).”
BackgroundInfluentialJeong, H. J., Moore, T. M., Durham, E. L., Reimann, G. E., Dupont, R. M., Cardenas‐Iniguez, C., Berman, M. G., Lahey, B. B., & Kaczkurkin, A. N. (2022) · Biological Psychiatry Global Open Science · doi:10.1016/j.bpsgos.2022.04.004 · Cited by 24
“Of the total sample of 11,878 youths, about three fourths of participants (9000 youths) were randomly selected for an exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM) analysis (24) to determine what underlying factors may be present, and the remaining participants (2878 youths) were reserved for a confirmatory bifactor…”
MethodBottesi, G., Iannattone, S., Carraro, E., & Lauriola, M. (2022) · Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology · doi:10.1007/s10802-022-00944-y · Cited by 25
“This condition is met for the one-factor and two-factor models, both nested in the bifactor model (Reise, 2012), and the two-factor model, which is nested in the one-factor model.”
MethodThe Structure of the Narcissistic Personality Inventory With Binary and Rating Scale Items
Boldero, J., Bell, R., & Davies, R. C. (2015) · Journal of Personality Assessment · doi:10.1080/00223891.2015.1039015 · Cited by 26
“, the explained common variance [ECV]) and the proportion of correlations in the analysis that are uncontaminated by general and group factor variance (i.e., PUC; Reise, 2012) are used.”
BackgroundInfluentialŠtochl, J., Boehnke, J. R., Pickett, K. E., & Croudace, T. J. (2016) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/s12874-016-0158-7 · Cited by 22
“Before the simulation of the adaptive administration of this item bank could be carried out, the factor analytic estimates needed to be converted to IRT parameters by using the following formulas [18, 36]; for each item i = 1, .”
BackgroundMethodZiebold, C., Goldberg, D. P., Reed, G. M., Minhas, F., Razzaque, B., Fortes, S., Robles, R., Lam, T. P., Bobes, J., García, C. I., et al. (2018) · Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/s0033291718001381 · Cited by 23
Development and validation of the Facial Expression Recognition Test (FERT).
Passarelli, M., Masini, M., Bracco, F., Petrosino, M., & Chiorri, C. (2018) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037/pas0000595 · Cited by 23
Ferentinos, P. P., Yotsidi, V., Porichi, E., Douzenis, A., Papageorgiou, C., & Stalikas, A. (2019) · Journal of Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1002/jclp.22780 · Cited by 23
Improving Bi-Factor Exploratory Modeling
García‐Garzón, E., Abad, F. J., & Garrido, L. E. (2019) · Methodology · doi:10.1027/1614-2241/a000163 · Cited by 23
Domínguez, A. Q., Ruiz, M. Á., Martínez, J. A. H., & Alonso‐Tapia, J. (2019) · Anales de Psicología · doi:10.6018/analesps.341001 · Cited by 31
“Several studies have pointed out that bifactor models usually tend to fit better than other competing models (e.g., Reise, 2012).”
BackgroundLas Escalas de Depresión, Ansiedad y Estrés (DASS-21): ¿miden algo más que un factor general?
de psicología, A. P. C. –. C., & Valencia, P. D. (2019) · Avances en Psicología · doi:10.33539/avpsicol.2019.v27n2.1796 · Cited by 31
“En conjunto, estos resultados sugieren la presencia de un factor general junto con algunos factores específicos de naturaleza residual, lo cual corresponde a un modelo bifactor (Reise, 2012; Reise, Bonifay, & Haviland, 2013; Rodriguez, Reise, & Haviland, 2016a, 2016b).”
BackgroundGillet, N., Morin, A. J. S., Jeoffrion, C., & Fouquereau, E. (2020) · Group & Organization Management · doi:10.1177/1059601119899182 · Cited by 28
“Bifactor-ESEM models provide a way to achieve a complete disaggregation of participants’ ratings into one global component reflecting the variance shared across all items and into specific components reflecting the variance shared among items, forming a dimension but not already explained by the G-factor, while taking…”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialConfirmatory factor analysis of the WISC-IV in a hospital referral sample.
Devena, S. E., Gay, C. E., & Watkins, M. W. (2013) · Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment · doi:10.1177/0734282913483981 · Cited by 22
“, 2006), the ease of interpretation and breadth of influence of the direct hierarchical model recommends that model over the indirect hierarchical model (Chen, Hayes, Carver, Laurenceau, & Zhang, 2012; Gignac, 2008; Reise, 2012).”
BackgroundMethodChamot, E., Kister, I., & Cutter, G. (2014) · BMC Neurology · doi:10.1186/s12883-014-0192-1 · Cited by 22
“As a follow-up, we fitted three CFA models to the data (Additional file 2): (1) a unidimensional model, where the 11 PS represented a single construct of global disability; (2) a two-dimensional model composed of two correlated factors that we loosely referred to as “physical disability” (mobility, hand, bladder/bowel…”
McKay, M. T., Morgan, G. B., van Exel, J. N. A., & Worrell, F. C. (2015) · Journal of Personality Assessment · doi:10.1080/00223891.2014.999338 · Cited by 23
“Although commonly applied only to the general factor in a bifactor model, the concepts underlying hierarchical omega can be applied to the subscale reliability, controlling for the effects of the general factor (Reise, 2012).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialTerluin, B., Brouwers, E. P. M., Marchand, M. A. G., & de Vet, H. C. W. (2018) · Quality of Life Research · doi:10.1007/s11136-018-1816-5 · Cited by 22
Validity of evaluative factors from Big Five and HEXACO questionnaires
Biderman, M. D., McAbee, S. T., Hendy, N. T., & Chen, Z. J. (2019) · Journal of Research in Personality · doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2019.04.010 · Cited by 22
“…there is an accumulation of evidence that for multidimensional questionnaires in general, bifactor models often provide better fit than correlated factors models (Brunner, Nagy, & Wilhelm, 2012; Chen, West, & Sousa, 2006; Gignac, 2016; Markon, 2009; Reise, 2012; Yung, Thissen, & McLeod, 1999).”
BackgroundMethodPérez-Díaz, P. A., & Petrides, K. V. (2019) · Journal of Personality Assessment · doi:10.1080/00223891.2019.1692856 · Cited by 32
Copez-Lonzoy, A. J. E., Domínguez-Lara, S., & Merino‐Soto, C. (2020) · Revista de Psicopatología y Psicología Clínica · doi:10.5944/rppc.24335 · Cited by 22
Regularized Exploratory Bifactor Analysis With Small Sample Sizes
Jung, S., Seo, D. G., & Park, J. (2020) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00507 · Cited by 28
“Previous studies have extensively demonstrated the benefits of using the bifactor model to analyze behavioral data (see Chen et al., 2006; Pomplun, 2007; Reise, 2012).”
BackgroundBifactor structure and model reliability of the Test of Gross Motor Development — 3rd edition
Garn, A. C., & Webster, E. K. (2020) · Journal of science and medicine in sport · doi:10.1016/j.jsams.2020.08.009 · Cited by 22
Recommendations for Adjudicating Among Alternative Structural Models of Psychopathology
Waldman, I. D., King, C. D., Poore, H. E., Luningham, J. M., Zinbarg, R. E., Krueger, R. F., Markon, K. E., Bornovalova, M. A., Chmielewski, M. S., Conway, C., et al. (2023) · Clinical Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/21677026221144256 · Cited by 27
“The optimal case for the validity of a factor is that the loadings of its indicators should be relatively consistent and moderate to high in magnitude (K. Bollen, 2011; K. A. Bollen, 2020; Fabrigar et al., 1999; Reise, 2012; Savalei & Reise, 2019; Yang & Green, 2010).”
BackgroundInfluentialExamination of a Bifactor Model of Obsessive-Compulsive Symptom Dimensions
Olatunji, B. O., Ebesutani, C. K., & Abramowitz, J. S. (2015) · Assessment · doi:10.1177/1073191115601207 · Cited by 22
“Although the bifactor model may not be appropriate for all data and psychological phenomena, the bifactor model has been found to fit psychological data well across different problem areas, sample types, and ages (e.g., Ebesutani, McLeish, Luberto, Young, & Maack, 2014; Reise, 2012; Reise et al., 2007).”
MethodBifactor structure of the Schizotypal Personality Questionnaire (SPQ)
Preti, A., Siddi, S., Vellante, M., Scanu, R., Muratore, T., Gabbrielli, M., Tronci, D., Masala, C., & Петретто, Д. Р. (2015) · Psychiatry Research · doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2015.11.010 · Cited by 22
Bifactor Modeling of the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF) in a Chilean Sample
Pérez-Salas, C., Ramos-Galarza, C., Oliva, K., & Ortega, A. (2016) · Perceptual and Motor Skills · doi:10.1177/0031512516650441 · Cited by 28
“As Reise (2012) stated A bifactor structural model specifies that the covariance among a set of item responses can be accounted for by a single general factor that reflects the common variance running among all scale items and group factors that reflect additional common variance among clusters of…”
BackgroundFonseca‐Pedrero, E., Cohen, A. S., Sierra, J. O., Pérez‐Albéniz, A., & Muñiz, J. (2016) · Journal of Personality Disorders · doi:10.1521/pedi_2016_30_266 · Cited by 26
Professor or manager? A model of motivational orientations applied to preferred career paths
Burk, C. L., & Wiese, B. S. (2018) · Journal of Research in Personality · doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2018.06.002 · Cited by 26
Wendler, K., Liu, J., & Zettler, I. (2018) · Journal of Personnel Psychology · doi:10.1027/1866-5888/a000203 · Cited by 21
“Thus, we used bifactor modeling (see Reise, 2012) to build one general context perception factor (from perceptions of interactional justice as well as perceptions of organizational politics) and one general job performance factor (from task performance and OCB).”
MethodA new scale for measuring quality of life in acquired brain injury
Fernández, M., Gómez, L. E., Arias, V. B., Aguayo, V., Amor, A. M., Anđelić, N., & Alonso, M. Á. V. (2018) · Quality of Life Research · doi:10.1007/s11136-018-2047-5 · Cited by 22
Open Peer Commentary and Author's Response
Bizumić, B., & Monaghan, C. (2020) · European Journal of Personality · doi:10.1002/per.2284 · Cited by 23
Assessment of adolescents’ motivation for educational attainment.
Cham, H., Hughes, J. N., West, S. G., & Im, M. H. (2014) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037/a0036213 · Cited by 24
“As a second method of evaluating the model, Table 4 presents McDonald’s (1999) coefficient ω as a measure of reliability calculated for each of the factors at Years 9 and 10 (see also Reise, 2012; Zinbarg, Yovel, Revelle, & McDonald, 2006).”
BackgroundMethodShafiei, G., Esper, N. B., Hoffmann, M. S., Ai, L., Chen, A. A., Cluce, J., Covitz, S. C., Giavasis, S., Lane, C., Mehta, K. P., et al. (2025) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2025.08.026 · Cited by 32
Strickland, T., Watkins, M. W., & Caterino, L. C. (2015) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037/pas0000052 · Cited by 23
“This bifactor model (Reise, 2012), which has also been called a direct hierarchical model (Gignac, 2008) and a nested factor model (Gustafsson & Balke, 1993), has been recommended for hierarchically structured constructs such as intelligence (Brunner, Nagy, & Wilhelm, 2012), has been applied to…”
MethodLiu, J., Xiang, P., McBride, R. E., & Chen, H. (2018) · European Physical Education Review · doi:10.1177/1356336x18755087 · Cited by 29
“Liu et al. 619 Bifactor analysis has recently gained wide recognition in hierarchical modeling applications (Reise, 2012).”
BackgroundInfluentialSolstad, B. E., Stenling, A., Ommundsen, Y., Wold, B., Heuzé, J.-P., Sarrazin, P. G., Castillo, I., Cruz, J., Hall, H., Papaioannou, A. G., et al. (2020) · Journal of Sports Sciences · doi:10.1080/02640414.2020.1722575 · Cited by 28
“In the bifactor model the general and specific factors were specified as orthogonal to ensure interpretability (Reise, 2012).”
MethodSelf-Concept Focus: A Tendency to Perceive Autobiographical Events as Central to Identity
Rubin, D. C. (2020) · Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.jarmac.2020.06.001 · Cited by 23
A systematic review and meta‐analytic factor analysis of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales.
Yeung, A. Y., Yuliawati, L., & Cheung, S. H. (2020) · Clinical Psychology Science and Practice · doi:10.1111/cpsp.12362 · Cited by 69
A Family Socialization Model of Transdiagnostic Risk for Psychopathology in Preschool Children
Wade, M., Plamondon, A., & Jenkins, J. M. (2021) · Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology · doi:10.1007/s10802-021-00789-x · Cited by 21
“For Aim 1, latent bifactor modeling (Reise, 2012) was used to estimate P, INT, and EXT factors using a combination of mother and partner reports of child psychopathology at age 3.”
MethodShevlin, M. E., Hyland, P., Nolan, E., Owczarek, M., Ben‐Ezra, M., & Karatzias, T. (2021) · British Journal of Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1111/bjc.12321 · Cited by 27
“The latent variables were specified to be uncorrelated (Reise, 2012) and all unique variances were uncorrelated.”
BackgroundEvaluating evidence for a global mindset factor across multiple ability domains
Lewis, K. M., Donnellan, M. B., Ribeiro, J. S., & Trzesniewski, K. H. (2021) · Journal of Research in Personality · doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2021.104165 · Cited by 28
Salami, S., Bandeira, P. F. R., Gomes, C. M. A., & Dehkordi, P. S. (2021) · Journal of Motor Learning and Development · doi:10.1123/jmld.2020-0069 · Cited by 21
Gegenfurtner, A., & Quesada‐Pallarès, C. (2022) · Studies In Educational Evaluation · doi:10.1016/j.stueduc.2021.101116 · Cited by 26
Measurement Invariance of Moral Foundations across Population Strata
Nilsson, A. (2022) · Journal of Personality Assessment · doi:10.1080/00223891.2022.2074853 · Cited by 22
“It is therefore conceivable that variation in responses stems in part from the foundation that the item taps into and in part from whether it is a judgment item or a relevance item, and this can be adequately modeled through a bifactor model (Reise, 2012).”
BackgroundMoore, T. M., Sandro, A. D., Scott, J. C., Lopez, K. C., Ruparel, K., Njokweni, L. J., Santra, S., Conway, D. S., Port, A. M., D’Errico, L., et al. (2023) · Journal of Neuroscience Methods · doi:10.1016/j.jneumeth.2023.109795 · Cited by 21
McKay, M. T., Cole, J. C., & Percy, A. (2015) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2015.04.022 · Cited by 22
Schult, J., & Sparfeldt, J. R. (2016) · Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.intell.2016.08.004 · Cited by 26
Arens, A. K., & Morin, A. J. S. (2016) · American Educational Research Journal · doi:10.3102/0002831216666490 · Cited by 22
“Although this suggests similarities between higher-order and bifactor models, the SLP shows that hierarchical factor models implicitly rely on more stringent assumptions (Chen, West, & Sousa, 2006; Reise, 2012).”
InfluentialEmpirical Underidentification with the Bifactor Model: A Case Study
Green, S., & Yang, Y. (2017) · Educational and Psychological Measurement · doi:10.1177/0013164417719947 · Cited by 21
“Because bifactor models are frequently applied in practice in recent years (Reise, 2012), it is a helpful heuristic rule for researchers to know to explain problems that may occur in conducting their analyses.”
BackgroundMethodA Multilevel Bifactor Approach to Construct Validation of Mixed-Format Scales
Wang, Y. Q., Kim, E., Dedrick, R. F., Ferron, J. M., & Tan, T. X. (2017) · Educational and Psychological Measurement · doi:10.1177/0013164417690858 · Cited by 21
“Bifactor structures have been used to model multidimensionality of measures when all items are expected to measure a common construct while a subset of items measure a subdomain construct in addition to the common trait (Reise, 2012).”
BackgroundMethodMurray, A. L., Booth, T., Obsuth, I., Zirk‐Sadowski, J., Eisner, M., & Ribeaud, D. (2018) · Psychiatry Research · doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2018.08.120 · Cited by 26
“…be addressed via methods such as utilising a bi-factor measurement model to separate variation common versus unique to these forms of aggression, in practice in the case of the measure used in the current sample, this leaves insufficient reliable variance in the unique factors (e.g. Reise, 2012).”
MethodSlaten, C. D., Rose, C. A., Bonifay, W. E., & Ferguson, J. K. (2018) · School Psychology · doi:10.1037/spq0000299 · Cited by 25
“The bifactor model is an increasingly popular approach to measurement (see Reise, 2012), wherein the items constituting a scale are hypothesized to reflect an overall latent dimension (or “general factor”) along with several clusters of dimensions (or “specific factors”) that have shared content.”
MethodMeasuring fatigue in cancer patients: a common metric for six fatigue instruments
Friedrich, M., Hinz, A., Kuhnt, S., Schulte, T., Rose, M., & Fischer, F. H. (2019) · Quality of Life Research · doi:10.1007/s11136-019-02147-3 · Cited by 21
Okuda, P. M. M., Pangelinan, M. M., Capellini, S. A., & Cogo‐Moreira, H. (2019) · Trends in Psychiatry and Psychotherapy · doi:10.1590/2237-6089-2018-0014 · Cited by 21
Scaling the Variance of a Latent Variable While Assuring Constancy of the Model
SCHWEIZER, K. W., Troche, S. J., & DiStefano, C. (2019) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00887 · Cited by 21
“Besides these statistical approaches, there are further analysis strategies that may profit from comparisons of the variances of latent variables, such as the multitrait-multimethod approach (Marsh and Grayson, 1995) and the bifactor approach (Reise, 2012).”
MethodSaavedra, P., & Drury, J. (2019) · Journal of Social and Political Psychology · doi:10.5964/jspp.v7i2.1030 · Cited by 21
“Bifactor Model In recent years, bifactor models have been rediscovered by researchers to test multidimensional constructs where a general factor and a set of specific subdomains coexist under some basic rules: (1) each indicator shares variance with a general factor and with only one subscale at the same time; (2) the…”
BackgroundGranger, S., Neville, L., & Turner, N. (2019) · Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology · doi:10.1111/joop.12293 · Cited by 23
“Bi-factor modelling is a structural equation approach used to parse variance explained by a general factor (e.g., an overall latent factor of self- and other-ratings) from factors that explain variance byhow they are clustered (e.g., latent factors for each rater-source; Reise, 2012).”
BackgroundMethodCardenas‐Iniguez, C., Moore, T. M., Kaczkurkin, A. N., Meyer, F. A. C., Satterthwaite, T. D., Fair, D. A., White, T. J. H., Blok, E., Applegate, B. E., Thompson, L. M., et al. (2020) · Biological Psychiatry Cognitive Neuroscience and Neuroimaging · doi:10.1016/j.bpsc.2020.11.007 · Cited by 25
“, internalizing, conduct problems, and attention-deficit/ hyperactivity disorder [ADHD]) (15).”
BackgroundHammer, J. H., & Brenner, R. E. (2017) · Journal of Personality Assessment · doi:10.1080/00223891.2017.1344986 · Cited by 24
“…the covariation among the 16 GRAT–RS items could be best accounted for by (a) a single general gratitude factor that reflects the common variance across all items, and (b) three specific factors that capture additional (i.e., unique) common variance among clusters of items (Reise, 2012, p. 688).”
BackgroundChilcot, J., Almond, M. K., Guirguis, A., Friedli, K., Day, C. J., Davenport, A., Wellsted, D. M., & Farrington, K. (2018) · General Hospital Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2018.08.007 · Cited by 21
“saturation of a multidimensional scale by a general factor [18,19].”
BackgroundFactor Structure of the Sussex-Oxford Compassion Scales
Halamová, J., & Kanovský, M. (2021) · Psihologijske teme · doi:10.31820/pt.30.3.5 · Cited by 21
“On the other hand, bifactor models (Reise, 2012; see Figure 1 below) allow for the estimation of an overarching general construct without relying on the restrictive implicit assumption of the proportionality constraint, and for a separate and straightforward assessment of variance uniquely…”
BackgroundInfluentialDomínguez-Lara, S., & Merino‐Soto, C. (2017) · Educación Médica · doi:10.1016/j.edumed.2017.04.011 · Cited by 20
Marsh, H. W., & Scalas, L. F. (2017) · Structural Equation Modeling A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1080/10705511.2017.1370377 · Cited by 21
“…the original analyses by Scalas et al. (2013) and consistent with recommendations by Marsh et al. (2010), here we also use a bifactor model (Reise, 2012; also see Marsh, Morin, Parker, & Kaur, 2014) in which all 10 items load on the global esteem factor, whereas positively worded items…”
Murray, A. L., Booth, T., Eisner, M., Obsuth, I., & Ribeaud, D. (2018) · Journal of Personality Assessment · doi:10.1080/00223891.2018.1468338 · Cited by 20
“A bifactor model is a measurement model in which each indicator loads on two factors: a general factor common to all indicators and a group factor common to a subset of indicators (Reise, 2012).”
Penas, P., Uriarte, J. J. U., Gorbeña, S., Moreno-Calvete, M. C., Ridgway, P., & Castillo, I. I. (2020) · Frontiers in Psychiatry · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00595 · Cited by 22
“Higher ECV values indicate a strong general factor, which may guide the decision to fit a unidimensional model even with data that are multidimensional (20).”
BackgroundMethodScarpa, M. P., Zopluoglu, C., & Prilleltensky, I. (2021) · Journal of Community Psychology · doi:10.1002/jcop.22725 · Cited by 20
Kuhlmann, S. L., Bernacki, M. L., Greene, J. A., Hogan, K. A., Evans, M., Plumley, R. D., Gates, K. M., & Panter, A. T. (2023) · Contemporary Educational Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2023.102162 · Cited by 26
Popescu, B., Maricutoiu, L. P., & Witte, H. D. (2023) · Current Psychology · doi:10.1007/s12144-023-04232-w · Cited by 27
“Despite this, there was a strong single factor in the S-BAT, which is consistent with the idea that the scale measures only one construct (i.e., burnout syndrome) (Reise, 2012).”
Hindman, A. H., Pendergast, L. L., & Gooze, R. A. (2016) · Early Childhood Research Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.ecresq.2016.01.012 · Cited by 22
On the measurement of low self-control in Add Health and NLSY79
Wolfe, S. E., & Hoffmann, J. P. (2016) · Psychology Crime and Law · doi:10.1080/1068316x.2016.1168428 · Cited by 20
“Some researchers have argued that this approach may best capture the effects of latent constructs on various outcomes since residual variance does not necessarily denote measurement error (e.g. Reise, 2012).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialOlatunji, B. O., Ebesutani, C. K., & Kim, E. H. (2014) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037/pas0000039 · Cited by 20
Moore, T. M., Calkins, M. E., Reise, S. P., Gur, R. C., & Gur, R. E. (2018) · Psychiatry Research · doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2018.02.022 · Cited by 20
“Speci fi cally, we used bifactor modeling (Reise, 2012; Reise et al., 2010), which allows items to load on one general factor (in this case, Schizotypy) and one speci fi c factor (depending on the sub-factor to which it belongs).”
MethodSelf-citationCai, Y., & Kunnan, A. J. (2018) · Language Assessment Quarterly · doi:10.1080/15434303.2018.1451532 · Cited by 20
“A prominent example of these transformed models is the bifactorMIRT discovered by Gibbons and Hedeker (1992), later improved by Cai, Yang, and Hansen (2011) and Reise (2012).”
BackgroundThe Dimensionality of Oral Language in Kindergarten Spanish–English Dual Language Learners
Gray, S. I., O'Connell, A. A., Restrepo, M. A., Yeomans‐Maldonado, G., Bengochea, A., Mesa, C., Brinkley, S., Yeomans‐Maldonado, G., Bengochea, A., & Mesa, C. (2018) · Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research · doi:10.1044/2018_jslhr-l-17-0320 · Cited by 20
Repetitive Negative Thought and Executive Dysfunction: An Interactive Pathway to Emotional Distress
Madian, N., Bredemeier, K., Heller, W., Miller, G. A., & Warren, S. L. (2018) · Cognitive Therapy and Research · doi:10.1007/s10608-018-9966-x · Cited by 24
“All factors were specified as orthogonal, consistent with standard procedures for bi-factor modeling (Reise 2012) and with the original model (Friedman et al.”
Åhlén, J., & Ghaderi, A. (2019) · Development and Psychopathology · doi:10.1017/s0954579418001384 · Cited by 24
Is the DOSPERT gender invariant? A psychometric test of measurement invariance
Zhang, D. C., Foster, G. C., & McKenna, M. G. (2018) · Journal of Behavioral Decision Making · doi:10.1002/bdm.2105 · Cited by 21
Moreira, P., Cunha, D., & Inman, R. A. (2019) · Journal of Personality Assessment · doi:10.1080/00223891.2019.1585360 · Cited by 27
“Considering the work of Reise and colleagues (Reise, 2012; Reise, Moore, & Haviland, 2010) we made our first assessment of scale unidimensionality by comparing the standardized factor loadings for the general and specific factors of the championed bifactor model.”
BackgroundMethod
Metadata
- Authors
- Reise, S. P.
- Affiliations
- University of California, Los Angeles (US)
- Corresponding author
- Reise, Steven P.
- ORCID
- Reise, Steven P.
- Venue
- Multivariate Behavioral Research
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2012-09
- Volume
- 47
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 667-696
- ISSN
- 0027-3171 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-7906
- PMC
- PMC3773879
- OpenAlex
- W2025929695
- Cited by
- 2,112
- References
- 70
- Citations by year
- 2026: 203 · 2025: 113 · 2024: 134 · 2023: 174 · 2022: 165 · 2021: 200 · 2020: 222 · 2019: 181 · 2018: 203 · 2017: 175 · 2016: 139 · 2015: 98 · 2014: 68 · 2013: 32 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 85.93
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Multivariate Behavioral Research (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health
- National Institute on Drug Abuse (RL1DA024853)
- National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (U01AR052177)
- National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (UL1DE019580)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
- Keywords
- bifactor model, multidimensionality, general factor, parameter invariance, nested models, construct measurement, psychometric properties
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