CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 2,454Psychometric Methodologies and TestingPsychology Research and BibliometricsMeta-analysis and systematic reviews

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 118 of the 119 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Use of Exploratory Factor Analysis in Published Research: Common Errors and Some Comment on Improved Practice

Henson, Robin K., Roberts, J. Kyle·2006·Educational and Psychological Measurement
DOI 10.1177/0013164405282485
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Given the proliferation of factor analysis applications in the literature, the present article examines the use of factor analysis in current published research across four psychological journals. Notwithstanding ease of analysis due to computers, the appropriate use of factor analysis requires a series of thoughtful researcher judgments. These judgments directly affect results and interpretations. The authors examine across studies (a) the decisions made while conducting exploratory factor analyses ( N = 60) and (b) the information reported from the analyses. In doing so, they present a review of the current status of factor analytic practice, including comment on common errors in use and reporting. Recommendations are proffered for future practice as regards analytic decisions and reporting in empirical research.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0013164405282485

Cites

118 of 118 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 119 references

Research works printed but not linked: 13

  1. Cattell, R. B., 1967, Multivariate Behavioral Research Monographs, 3, 1
  2. Fan, X., 1996, Advances in social science methodology, 71
  3. Gorsuch, R. L., 1983, Factor analysis
  4. Henson, R. K., 2000, Multiple Linear Regression Viewpoints, 26, 11
  5. Henson, R. K., 2004, Research in the Schools, 11, 61
  6. Henson, R. K., 2000, Journal of Research and Development in Education, 33, 284
  7. Hetzel, R. D., 1996, Advances in social science methodology, 175
  8. Kieffer, K. M., 1999, Research in the Schools, 6, 75
  9. Mote, T. A., 1970, Revista Interamericana de Psicologia, 37, 61
  10. Nunnally, J. C., 1978, Psychometric theory
  11. Thompson, B., 1991, Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 24, 80
  12. Thompson, B., 1992, Advances in social science methodology, 81
  13. Thompson, B., 2000, Reading and understanding more multivariate statistics, 207

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 2,454

Related

Metadata

Authors
Henson, R. K., & Roberts, J. K.
Affiliations
  • University of North Texas (US)
  • Baylor College of Medicine (US)
ORCID
Henson, Robin K.
Venue
Educational and Psychological Measurement
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2006-06
Volume
66
Issue
3
Pages
393-416
ISSN
  • 0013-1644 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-3888
DOI
10.1177/0013164405282485
OpenAlex
W2097665571
Cited by
2,454
References
119
Citations by year
2026: 129 · 2025: 164 · 2024: 186 · 2023: 182 · 2022: 184 · 2021: 217 · 2020: 203 · 2019: 163 · 2018: 147 · 2017: 148 · 2016: 137 · 2015: 133 · 2014: 125 · 2013: 74 · 2012: 58
FWCI
44.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
Educational and Psychological Measurement (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Psychology Research and Bibliometrics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
Keywords
exploratory factor analysis, psychology journals

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