The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Model Modification in Covariance Structure Modeling: A Comparison among Likelihood Ratio, Lagrange Multiplier, and Wald Tests
Abstract
Model comparisons in covariance structure modeling have traditionally been carried out by the likelihood ratio difference (D) test. Two more convenient approaches are reviewed and evaluated. The Lagrange Multiplier (LM) test evaluates the impact of model modification from a more limited model whereas the Wald (W) test makes the evaluation from a more general model. The empirical performance of the D, LM, and W tests under null and alternative hypotheses are compared in this study. The results indicate that both new tests performed as well as the D test for reasonable sample sizes. The nonmonotonicity of power function for the W test was discovered; however, it is not severe in this study. The LM test behaved as a central or noncentral X[SUP2] variate under null or alternative hypotheses, as expected. However, when a correct null hypothesis was embedded in a composite hypothesis which was false, an incremental LM test tended to suggest more parameters than needed to be freed, especially at larger sample sizes. This incorrect behavior of the LM test was correctable by following up the LM test by a W test, that is, a combination of both LM and W tests seemed to provide a fairly satisfactory outcome in the process of model modification.
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
Practical issues in structural modeling
BENTLER, P. M., & CHOU, C.-P. (1987) · Sociological Methods & Research · doi:10.1177/0049124187016001004 · Cited by 5,804
Self-citation
Cited by
Development and validation of a brief screening version of the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire
Bernstein, D. P., Stein, J. A., Newcomb, M. D., Walker, E., Pogge, D., Ahluvalia, T., Stokes, J., Handelsman, L., Medrano, M., Desmond, D., et al. (2003) · Child Abuse & Neglect · doi:10.1016/s0145-2134(02)00541-0 · Cited by 6,419
A Brief Guide to Structural Equation Modeling
Weston, R., & Gore, P. A. (2006) · The Counseling Psychologist · doi:10.1177/0011000006286345 · Cited by 2,718
Building Effective Online Marketplaces with Institution-Based Trust
Pavlou, P. A., & Gefen, D. (2004) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.1040.0015 · Cited by 2,516
Cloitre, M., Shevlin, M., Brewin, C. R., Bisson, J. I., Roberts, N. P., Maercker, A., Karatzias, T., & Hyland, P. (2018) · Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica · doi:10.1111/acps.12956 · Cited by 1,314
On the emancipation of PLS-SEM: a commentary on Rigdon (2012)
Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., Henseler, J., & Hair, J. F. (2014) · Long Range Planning · doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2014.02.007 · Cited by 758
Metadata
- Authors
- Chou, C.-P., & Bentler, P. M.
- Venue
- Multivariate Behavioral Research
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1990-01
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 115-136
- ISSN
- 0027-3171 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-7906
- OpenAlex
- W2084665679
- Cited by
- 410
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 12.23
- 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: Model Modification in Covariance Structure Modeling: A Comparison among Likelihood Ratio, Lagrange Multiplier, and Wald Tests. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1207/s15327906mbr2501_13
- The paper
- Chou, C.-P., & Bentler, P. M. (1990). Model Modification in Covariance Structure Modeling: A Comparison among Likelihood Ratio, Lagrange Multiplier, and Wald Tests. Multivariate Behavioral Research. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr2501_13
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.