The DOI matches its Crossref record; 35 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
An Empirical Evaluation of the Use of Fixed Cutoff Points in RMSEA Test Statistic in Structural Equation Models
Open accessAbstract
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.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“Following previous recommendations, we considered a decrease in CFI of 0.01 and an increase in RMSEA of 0.015 as unacceptable to establish measurement invariance [54].”
From Procrastination, depression and anxiety symptoms in university students: a three-wave longitudinal study on the mediating role of perceived stress (2024) · cites this paper as [54]
Citations
Cites
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999) · Structural Equation Modeling A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1080/10705519909540118 · Cited by 108,788
Alternative Ways of Assessing Model Fit
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992) · Sociological Methods & Research · doi:10.1177/0049124192021002005 · Cited by 27,200
Comparative fit indexes in structural models.
Bentler, P. M. (1990) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238 · Cited by 25,266
Hu, L.-T., & Bentler, P. M. (1998) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.3.4.424 · Cited by 12,298
Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling.
MacCallum, R. C., Browne, M. W., & Sugawara, H. M. (1996) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.1.2.130 · Cited by 10,418
EQS : structural equations program manual
Bentler, P. M. (1989) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 9,669
Testing Structural Equation Models.
Clogg, C. C., Bollen, K. A., & Long, J. S. (1995) · Social Forces · doi:10.2307/2580595 · Cited by 8,246
Self-citationMarsh, H. W., Hau, K.-T., & Wen, Z. (2004) · Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1207/s15328007sem1103_2 · Cited by 6,691
Structural equation modelling: Adjudging model fit
Barrett, P. T. (2006) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2006.09.018 · Cited by 2,640
Statistically based tests for the number of common factors
Steiger, J. H. (1980) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 2,413
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Steiger, J.H., 1989, Causal modeling: a supplementary module for SYSTAT and SYGRAPH
- Steiger, J.H., Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Psychometric Society
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Putnick, D. L., & Bornstein, M. H. (2016) · Developmental Review · doi:10.1016/j.dr.2016.06.004 · Cited by 4,369
The Performance of RMSEA in Models With Small Degrees of Freedom
Kenny, D. A., Kaniskan, B., & McCoach, D. B. (2015) · Sociological Methods & Research · doi:10.1177/0049124114543236 · Cited by 2,841
On making causal claims: A review and recommendations
Antonakis, J., Bendahan, S., Jacquart, P., & Lalive, R. (2010) · The Leadership Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2010.10.010 · Cited by 2,441
Gefen (2011) · doi:10.2307/23044042 · Cited by 1,596
Applications of structural equation modeling (SEM) in ecological studies: an updated review
Fan, Y., Chen, J., Shirkey, G., John, R., Wu, S. R., Park, H., & Shao, C. (2016) · Ecological Processes · doi:10.1186/s13717-016-0063-3 · Cited by 1,640
Metadata
- 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
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2008-05
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 462-494
- ISSN
- 0049-1241 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-8294
- PMC
- PMC2743032
- 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
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- 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
