The DOI matches its Crossref record; 20 of the 20 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Analysis of Covariance Structures: Goodness-of-Fit Indices
Abstract
A major problem encountered in covariance structure analyses involves decisions concerning whether or not a given theoretical model adequately represents the data used for its assessment. Given that X 2 goodness-of-fit tests are joint functions of the difference between theoretical and empirical covariance structures and sample size, gauging the impact of sample size on such tests is essential. In this paper, we propose a simple index (critical N) and tentative acceptance criterion, which, by focusing on sample size, provide an improved method for assessing goodness-of-fit. Both small- and large-sample examples are presented, illustrating the utility of the proposed method for assessing theoretical models.
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
“Hoelter (1983) introduced the Critical N (CN) statistic for the evaluation of SEM sample size, where CN ≥ 200 was considered adequate.”
From Applied Psychometrics: Sample Size and Sample Power Considerations in Factor Analysis (EFA, CFA) and SEM in General (2018) · cites this paper as Hoelter, 1983
In the citing paper
“However, the Hoelter(0.05)(Hoelter, 1983) estimate (n=264) suggests that the lack of absolute fit can be explained by sample size.”
From How the interplay between consumer motivations and values influences organic food identity and behavior (2018) · cites this paper as Hoelter, 1983
Citations
Cites
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 20,015
A Reliability Coefficient for Maximum Likelihood Factor Analysis
Tucker, L. R., & Lewis, C. (1973) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02291170 · Cited by 7,330
A General Approach to Confirmatory Maximum Likelihood Factor Analysis
Jöreskog, K. G. (1969) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02289343 · Cited by 2,629
Simultaneous Factor Analysis in Several Populations
Jöreskog, K. G. (1971) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02291366 · Cited by 2,051
Statistical analysis of sets of congeneric tests
Jöreskog, K. G. (1971) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02291393 · Cited by 1,481
Structural Analysis of Covariance and Correlation Matrices
Jöreskog, K. G. (1978) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02293808 · Cited by 1,006
Some contributions to maximum likelihood factor analysis
Jöreskog, K. (1967) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02289658 · Cited by 880
Advances in Factor Analysis and Structural Equation Models.
Hermann, J., Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1980) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2287220 · Cited by 795
A GENERAL METHOD FOR STUDYING DIFFERENCES IN FACTOR MEANS AND FACTOR STRUCTURE BETWEEN GROUPS
Sörbom, D. (1974) · British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.2044-8317.1974.tb00543.x · Cited by 677
A Modified Multiple Regression Approach to the Analysis of Dichotomous Variables
Goodman, L. A. (1972) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2093491 · Cited by 338
Statistical Tables for Biological, Agricultural, and Medical Research
S., G. W. (1939) · Agronomy Journal · doi:10.2134/agronj1939.00021962003100020011x · Cited by 322
Leone, R. (1979) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.2307/3150724 · Cited by 226
On The Robustness Of Factor Analysis Against Crude Classification Of The Observations
Olsson, U. (1979) · Multivariate Behavioral Research · doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr1404_7 · Cited by 210
Interpreting the Likelihood Ratio Statistic in Factor Models When Sample Size is Small
Geweke, J. F., & Singleton, K. J. (1980) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1980.10477442 · Cited by 198
Factor Analysis and Measurement in Sociological Research.
Muller, K. E., Jackson, D. J., & Borgatta, E. R. (1983) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2288232 · Cited by 183
McGaw, B., & Jöreskog, K. G. (1971) · British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.2044-8317.1971.tb00463.x · Cited by 122
Robustness of the Maximum-Likelihood Estimation Procedure in Factor Analysis
Fuller, E. L., & Hemmerle, W. J. (1966) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02289512 · Cited by 60
Miller, J. M., Słomczyński, K. M., & Schoenberg, R. J. (1981) · Social Psychology Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3033832 · Cited by 48
Level of Occupational Aspiration: An Empirical Analysis
Haller, A. O., Otto, L. B., Meier, R. F., & Ohlendorf, G. W. (1974) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2094280 · Cited by 38
Social Measurement: Current Issues.
Sobel, M. E., Bohrnstedt, G. W., Borgatta, E. F., Schiffman, S. S., Reynolds, M. L., & Young, F. W. (1983) · Contemporary Sociology A Journal of Reviews · doi:10.2307/2068998 · Cited by 19
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 6
- BROWN, M. W., 1974, South African Stat. J., 8, 1
- JÖRESKOG, K. G., LISREL IV: Analysis of Structural Relationships by the Method of Maximum Likelihood
- JÖRESKOG, K. G., COFAMM: Confirmatory Factor Analysis with Model Modification
- JÖRESKOG, K. G., EFAP: Exploratory Factor Analysis Program
- SÖRBOM, D., Factor Analysis and Measurement in Sociological Research
- TINTNER, G., Econometrics
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999) · Structural Equation Modeling A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1080/10705519909540118 · Cited by 108,788
On the Evaluation of Structural Equation Models
Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1007/bf02723327 · Cited by 26,163
Evaluating Goodness-of-Fit Indexes for Testing Measurement Invariance
Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002) · Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1207/s15328007sem0902_5 · Cited by 16,280
Hu, L.-T., & Bentler, P. M. (1998) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.3.4.424 · Cited by 12,298
A Brief Tutorial on the Development of Measures for Use in Survey Questionnaires
Hinkin, T. R. (1998) · Organizational Research Methods · doi:10.1177/109442819800100106 · Cited by 4,095
Metadata
- Authors
- HOELTER, J. W.
- Affiliations
- University of Cincinnati (US)
- Corresponding author
- HOELTER, JON W.
- Venue
- Sociological Methods & Research
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1983-02
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 325-344
- ISSN
- 0049-1241 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-8294
- OpenAlex
- W2023172395
- Cited by
- 1,624
- References
- 20
- Citations by year
- 2026: 48 · 2025: 82 · 2024: 74 · 2023: 82 · 2022: 83 · 2021: 73 · 2020: 62 · 2019: 72 · 2018: 58 · 2017: 51 · 2016: 75 · 2015: 72 · 2014: 65 · 2013: 65 · 2012: 61
- FWCI
- 19.05
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Sociological Methods & Research (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- 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
- structural equation modeling, goodness-of-fit tests, sample size, model fit assessment, chi-square test, small sample inference, acceptance criteria
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
