Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 192

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Changing a Causal Hypothesis without Changing the Fit: some Rules for Generating Equivalent Path Models

Stelzl, Ingeborg·1986·Multivariate Behavioral Research

Abstract

Since computer programs have been available for estimating and testing linear causal models (e.g. LISREL by Jöreskog & Sörbom) these models have been used increasingly in the behavioral sciences. This paper discusses the problem that very different causal structures may fit the same set of data equally well. Equivalence of models is defined as undecidability in principle and four rules are presented showing how equivalent models may be generated. Rules I and II refer to inversions in the causal order of variables and Rules III and IV to replacements of paths by the assumption of correlated residuals. Three examples are given to illustrate how the rules are applied.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1207/s15327906mbr2103_3

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 192

Metadata

Authors
Stelzl, I.
Venue
Multivariate Behavioral Research
Published
1986-07
Volume
21
Issue
3
Pages
309-331
ISSN
  • 0027-3171 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-7906
OpenAlex
W1985385666
Cited by
192
References
0
FWCI
3.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Changing a Causal Hypothesis without Changing the Fit: some Rules for Generating Equivalent Path Models. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1207/s15327906mbr2103_3
The paper
Stelzl, I. (1986). Changing a Causal Hypothesis without Changing the Fit: some Rules for Generating Equivalent Path Models. Multivariate Behavioral Research. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr2103_3

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.