The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Impact of Specification Error on the Estimation, Testing, and Improvement of Structural Equation Models
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to assess the impact of misspecification on the estimation, testing, and improvement of structural equation models. A population study is conducted whereby a prototypical latent variable model is misspecified in various ways. Measurement model and structural model misspecifications are considered separately and together. The maximum likelihood estimator (ML) is compared to a limited information two-stage least squares (2SLS) estimator implemented in LISREL. The ratio of chi-square to its degrees of freedom and power of the likelihood ratio test is assessed for each misspecification. The modification index provided by LISREL is also studied. Results indicate that ML and 2SLS estimates of measurement and structural parameters are both affected by measurement model misspecification. For misspecification of the structural part, ML is shown to propagate errors throughout the structural parameters whereas 2SLS isolates errors only in the parameters of the misspecified equation. Results also show that relying on the ratio of chi-square to degrees of freedom as an index of fit may lead to accepting models with severe parameter bias. Finally, the modification index is shown to be an unreliable indicator of the location of a specification error.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Cites
A comparison of some methodologies for the factor analysis of non‐normal Likert variables
Muthén, B., & Kaplan, D. (1985) · British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.2044-8317.1985.tb00832.x · Cited by 1,778
Self-citation
Cited by
Curran, P. J., West, S. G., & Finch, J. F. (1996) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.1.1.16 · Cited by 5,512
Tests of the three-path mediated effect
Taylor, A. B., MacKinnon, D. P., & Tein, J.-Y. (2008) · Organizational Research Methods · doi:10.1177/1094428107300344 · Cited by 1,209
Planned missing data designs in psychological research.
Graham, J. W., Taylor, B. J., Olchowski, A. E., & Cumsille, P. E. (2006) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.11.4.323 · Cited by 573
Jackson, D. L. (2001) · Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1207/s15328007sem0802_3 · Cited by 321
Statistical properties of four effect-size measures for mediation models
Miočević, M., O’Rourke, H. P., MacKinnon, D. P., & Brown, H. C. (2018) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/s13428-017-0870-1 · Cited by 200
Metadata
- Authors
- Kaplan, D.
- Venue
- Multivariate Behavioral Research
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1988-01
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 69-86
- ISSN
- 0027-3171 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-7906
- OpenAlex
- W2041496744
- Cited by
- 163
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 11.90
- 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: The Impact of Specification Error on the Estimation, Testing, and Improvement of Structural Equation Models. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1207/s15327906mbr2301_4
- The paper
- Kaplan, D. (1988). The Impact of Specification Error on the Estimation, Testing, and Improvement of Structural Equation Models. Multivariate Behavioral Research. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr2301_4
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.