The DOI matches its Crossref record; 0 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Structural Equation Modeling: Basic Concepts and Applications in Personality Assessment Research
Abstract
Structural equation modeling (SEM) has become an increasingly used methodological strategy in psychology. Nevertheless, many psychologists continue to be unclear about how to apply this analytic tool in their research. This article reviews SEM from a conceptual perspective, particularly focusing on confirmatory factor analysis. Additionally, the relation between SEM and other analytic techniques (e.g., exploratory factor analysis) are addressed. A confirmatory factor analytic example is presented and reviewed in detail. Finally, limitations of SEM and other considerations are discussed.
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
“When reporting the assessment of model fit in SEM, it is important to use several different indices, as there are no consensus rules within the literature that researchers can follow (Crowley & Fan, 1997; Hooper et al., 2008).”
From Testing Mindfulness Mechanisms of Action on the Stress and Burnout of Social Workers (2024) · cites this paper as Crowley & Fan, 1997
Citations
Cites
Sagonzi. R P. Fometl. C. cY: Larcker, D F. I1981). Canonicd cnrreia:ior. mdysis ?A a special case clf swucrurd relations mode!. Muiriwn;tu B~luzi-iord Resenrch. i6. 4 3 4 - 4 9 .
(n.d.)
Unresolvedi3enller F. hf (1482: Confirmatory factor analysis vlii nonitera:i~r es:Ima!lnn. A k . t . inesprnsi\c rnet'hod. Zoitn~ai qf ii.f~;r!ierir:g Reseocch, i9, 4 1742.4.
(n.d.)
UnresolvedBenrier. P. 51. 1 1985) TIieo? arid irnpknte~ifcliiori q!" EQS .4 s:rucnci.ca; equcariom . p r o p m . h i .4ngrlt.s Bh 4DP Statrstlcal Sokware
(n.d.)
UnresolvedSentier. P M (,1991). EQS. Ssuc:uraI. rqua:ions program nanuai Los Angeles- BMDP Stadi!~sai
(n.d.)
Unresolved
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Structural Equation Modelling: Guidelines for Determining Model Fit
Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. R. (2008) · Dublin Institute of Technology · doi:10.21427/d7cf7r · Cited by 8,746
“While there are no golden rules for assessment of model fit, reporting a variety of indices is necessary ( Crowley and Fan 1997 ) because different indices reflect a different aspect of model fit.”
BackgroundInfluentialRhemtulla, M., Brosseau-Liard, P. É., & Savalei, V. (2012) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/a0029315 · Cited by 2,816
“…categorical leastsquares, robust statistics Supplemental materials: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0029315.supp Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) models are among the most popular types of structural equation models (SEMs) in psychology (Crowley & Fan, 1997; Marsh & Hau, 2007; Martens, 2005).”
BackgroundInfluentialNature and the Life Course: Pathways from Childhood Nature Experiences to Adult Environmentalism
Wells, N. M., & Lekies, K. S. (2006) · Children Youth and Environments · doi:10.1353/cye.2006.0031 · Cited by 1,047
“As the final step, this parsimonious model was cross-validated using the second subsample to ensure that any idiosyncrasies from the data were not influencing the research results (Crowley and Fan 1997).”
BackgroundMethodDevelopment of a generalized learning transfer system inventory
Holton, E. F., Bates, R. A., & Ruona, W. E. A. (2000) · Human Resource Development Quarterly · doi:10.1002/1532-1096(200024)11:4 · Cited by 889
Evaluating Model Fit:a Synthesis of the Structural Equation Modelling Literature
Hooper, D., Coughlan, J. P., & Mullen, M. R. (2008) · Arrow@dit (Dublin Institute of Technology) · doi:10.21427/d79b73 · Cited by 748
“This results in a less rigourous theoretical model that paradoxically produces better fit indices (Mulaik et al, 1989; Crowley and Fan, 1997).”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Crowley, S. L., & Fan, X.
- Affiliations
- Utah State University (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Personality Assessment
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1997-06
- Volume
- 68
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 508-531
- ISSN
- 0022-3891 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-7752
- OpenAlex
- W1971726054
- Cited by
- 311
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 40 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 10.37
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Personality Assessment (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Digital Commons - USU (Utah State University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
- Keywords
- structural equation modeling, confirmatory factor analysis, exploratory factor analysis, personality assessment
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Personality Assessment, Psychometrics, Research, Models, Statistical
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
