Cited by 1,778Psychometric Methodologies and TestingStatistical Methods and Bayesian InferenceStatistical Methods and Applications

A comparison of some methodologies for the factor analysis of non‐normal Likert variables

Muthén, Bengt, Kaplan, David·1985·British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology

Abstract

This paper considers the problem of applying factor analysis to non‐normal categorical variables. A Monte Carlo study is conducted where five prototypical cases of non‐normal variables are generated. Two normal theory estimators, ML and GLS, are compared to Browne's (1982) ADF estimator. A categorical variable methodology (CVM) estimator of Muthén (1984) is also considered for the most severely skewed case. Results show that ML and GLS chi‐square tests are quite robust but obtain too large values for variables that arc severely skewed and kurtotic. ADF, however, performs well. Parameter estimate bias appears non‐existent for all estimators. Results also show that ML and GLS estimated standard errors are biased downward. For ADF no such standard error bias was found. The CVM estimator appears to work well when applied to severely skewed variables that had been dichotomized. ML and GLS results for a kurtosis only case showed no distortion of chi‐square or parameter estimates and only a slight downward bias in estimated standard errors. The results are compared to those of other related studies.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.2044-8317.1985.tb00832.x

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Muthén, B., & Kaplan, D.
Affiliations
University of California, Los Angeles (US)
Corresponding author
Muthén, Bengt
Venue
British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1985-11
Volume
38
Issue
2
Pages
171-189
ISSN
  • 0007-1102 (ISSN-L)
  • 2044-8317
OpenAlex
W1985442257
Cited by
1,778
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 68 · 2025: 67 · 2024: 84 · 2023: 79 · 2022: 99 · 2021: 97 · 2020: 104 · 2019: 79 · 2018: 68 · 2017: 82 · 2016: 55 · 2015: 73 · 2014: 91 · 2013: 85 · 2012: 72
FWCI
10.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Science Foundation
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Applications
Keywords
factor analysis, Likert scale data, kurtosis, maximum likelihood estimation, generalized least squares, standard error bias

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