The DOI matches its Crossref record; 71 of the 71 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Modeling General and Specific Variance in Multifaceted Constructs: A Comparison of the Bifactor Model to Other Approaches
Abstract
This article recommends an alternative method for testing multifaceted constructs. Researchers often have to choose between two problematic approaches for analyzing multifaceted constructs: the total score approach and the individual score approach. Both approaches can result in conceptual ambiguity. The proposed bifactor model assesses simultaneously the general construct shared by the facets and the specific facets, over and above the general construct. We illustrate the bifactor model by examining the construct of Extraversion as measured by the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO‐PI‐R; C osta & M c C rae, 1992), with two college samples (N = 383 and 378). The analysis reveals that the facets of the NEO‐PI‐R Extraversion correlate with criteria in opposite directions after partialling out the general construct. The direction of gender differences also varies by facets. Bifactor models combine the advantages but avoid the drawbacks of the 2 existing methods and can lead to greater conceptual clarity.
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
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999) · Structural Equation Modeling A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1080/10705519909540118 · Cited by 108,788
Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales.
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063 · Cited by 32,433
The satisfaction with life scale
Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985) · Journal of Personality Assessment · doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13 · Cited by 31,768
Society and the Adolescent Self-Image
Rosenberg, M. (1965) · doi:10.1515/9781400876136 · Cited by 30,126
Alternative Ways of Assessing Model Fit
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992) · Sociological Methods & Research · doi:10.1177/0049124192021002005 · Cited by 27,200
Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures.
Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037//0033-2909.88.3.588 · Cited by 19,023
Testing Structural Equation Models.
Mueller, C. W., Bollen, K. A., & Long, J. S. (1994) · Contemporary Sociology · doi:10.2307/2074955 · Cited by 14,120
Testing Structural Equation Models.
Clogg, C. C., Bollen, K. A., & Long, J. S. (1995) · Social Forces · doi:10.2307/2580595 · Cited by 8,211
Carver, C. S., & White, T. L. (1994) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.67.2.319 · Cited by 7,306
Self-citationTo parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question, weighing the merits
Little, T. D., Cunningham, W. A., Shahar, G., & Widaman, K. F. (2002) · Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1207/s15328007sem0902_1 · Cited by 6,552
Cited by
The Rediscovery of Bifactor Measurement Models
Reise, S. P. (2012) · Multivariate Behavioral Research · doi:10.1080/00273171.2012.715555 · Cited by 2,112
“Partitioning Item Variance Psychological constructs, and item response data resulting from measures designed to assess such constructs, often are proposed to have a “hierarchical” or “multifaceted” structure (Brunner et al., 2012; Chen et al., 2012).”
Evaluating Bifactor Models: Calculating and Interpreting Statistical Indices
Rodriguez, A., Reise, S. P., & Haviland, M. G. (2016) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/met0000045 · Cited by 1,599
Predicting psychological and subjective well-being from personality: A meta-analysis
Anglim, J., Horwood, S., Smillie, L. D., Marrero, R. J., & Wood, J. K. (2020) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/bul0000226 · Cited by 855
Reise, S. P., Scheines, R., Widaman, K. F., & Haviland, M. G. (2013) · Educational and Psychological Measurement · doi:10.1177/0013164412449831 · Cited by 766
Hamre, B., Hatfield, B., Pianta, R., & Jamil, F. (2014) · Child Development · doi:10.1111/cdev.12184 · Cited by 592
Metadata
- Authors
- Chen, F. F., Hayes, A., Carver, C. S., Laurenceau, J., & Zhang, Z.
- Venue
- Journal of Personality
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2012-01-20
- Volume
- 80
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 219-251
- ISSN
- 0022-3506 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-6494
- OpenAlex
- W1896252344
- Cited by
- 536
- References
- 71
- FWCI
- 21.24
- 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: Modeling General and Specific Variance in Multifaceted Constructs: A Comparison of the Bifactor Model to Other Approaches. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2011.00739.x
- The paper
- Chen, F. F., Hayes, A., Carver, C. S., Laurenceau, J., & Zhang, Z. (2012). Modeling General and Specific Variance in Multifaceted Constructs: A Comparison of the Bifactor Model to Other Approaches. Journal of Personality. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2011.00739.x
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.
