CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 512Psychometric Methodologies and TestingStatistical Methods and ApplicationsStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 30 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Testing Interaction Effects in LISREL: Examination and Illustration of Available Procedures

Cortina, Jose M., Chen, Gilad, Dunlap, William P.·2001·Organizational Research Methods
DOI 10.1177/109442810144002
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The concomitant proliferation of causal modeling and hypotheses of multiplicative effects has brought about a tremendous need for procedures that allow the testing of moderated structural equation models (MSEMs). The seminal work of Kenny and Judd and Hayduk has been drawn on by several authors in the past 10 years, thus producing procedures that allow for such tests. Yet, utilization of MSEMs in empirical research has been quite rare. The purposes of this article are twofold. First, the authors discuss general issues with respect to multivariate normality, indicators of latent products, the nature of latent products, and identification problems in MSEM. Second, they review and illustrate techniques that are available for the testing of interaction effects in structural equation models.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/109442810144002

Cites

30 of 30 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 30 references

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Cohen, J. & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  2. 10.1177/014920639301900411 · DOI
  3. DeShon, R. P. & Schmitt, N. (1999, April). An evaluation of methods for modeling interactions in structural equation models. Paper presented at the 15th annual Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology conference, Atlanta, GA.
  4. 10.1177/014920639602200107 · DOI
  5. Satorra, A. & Bentler, P. M. (1988). Scaling corrections for chi-squared statistics in covariance structure analysis. Proceedings of the American Statistical Association, 1, 308-313.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 401–500 of 511

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Cortina, J. M., Chen, G., & Dunlap, W. P.
Affiliations
  • George Mason University (US)
  • Tulane University (US)
Venue
Organizational Research Methods
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2001-10
Volume
4
Issue
4
Pages
324-360
ISSN
  • 1094-4281 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-7425
DOI
10.1177/109442810144002
OpenAlex
W2146073395
Cited by
512
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 29 · 2017: 28 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 38 · 2014: 35 · 2013: 33 · 2012: 27
FWCI
5.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
Organizational Research Methods (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Keywords
interaction effects, multivariate normality, identification problem, LISREL, multiplicative effects, latent variable interactions

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