Cited by 1,538Psychometric Methodologies and TestingStatistical Methods and Bayesian InferenceStatistical Distribution Estimation and Applications

An Empirical Evaluation of the Use of Fixed Cutoff Points in RMSEA Test Statistic in Structural Equation Models

Open access
Feinian Chen, Curran, Patrick J., Bollen, Kenneth A., Kirby, James, Paxton, Pamela·2008·Sociological Methods & Research

Abstract

This article is an empirical evaluation of the choice of fixed cutoff points in assessing the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) test statistic as a measure of goodness-of-fit in Structural Equation Models. Using simulation data, the authors first examine whether there is any empirical evidence for the use of a universal cutoff, and then compare the practice of using the point estimate of the RMSEA alone versus that of using it jointly with its related confidence interval. The results of the study demonstrate that there is little empirical support for the use of .05 or any other value as universal cutoff values to determine adequate model fit, regardless of whether the point estimate is used alone or jointly with the confidence interval. The authors' analyses suggest that to achieve a certain level of power or Type I error rate, the choice of cutoff values depends on model specifications, degrees of freedom, and sample size.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0049124108314720

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chen, F., Curran, P. J., Bollen, K. A., Kirby, J., & Paxton, P.
Affiliations
  • North Carolina State University (US)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
  • Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US)
  • The Ohio State University (US)
Venue
Sociological Methods & Research
Published
2008-05
Volume
36
Issue
4
Pages
462-494
ISSN
  • 0049-1241 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-8294
OpenAlex
W2098563832
Cited by
1,538
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 99 · 2025: 116 · 2024: 115 · 2023: 124 · 2022: 124 · 2021: 112 · 2020: 99 · 2019: 95 · 2018: 107 · 2017: 85 · 2016: 72 · 2015: 75 · 2014: 78 · 2013: 59 · 2012: 56
FWCI
62.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Sociological Methods & Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (K01HD047369)
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 Distribution Estimation and Applications
Keywords
RMSEA, cut-off values, model fit indices, goodness of fit, structural equation modeling, confidence intervals, type I error, statistical power, sample size, degrees of freedom

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