The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Effect of Varying Degrees of Nonnormality in Structural Equation Modeling
Abstract
This simulation study investigated the robustness of structural equation modeling to different degrees of nonnormality under 2 estimation methods, generalized least squares and maximum likelihood, and 4 sample sizes, 100, 250, 500, and 1,000. Each of the slight and severe nonnormality degrees was comprised of pure skewness, pure kurtosis, and both skewness and kurtosis. Bias and standard errors of parameter estimates were analyzed. In addition, an analysis of variance was conducted to investigate the effects of the 3 factors on several goodness-of-fit indexes. The study found that standard errors of parameter estimates were not significantly affected by estimation methods and nonnormality conditions. As expected, standard errors decreased at larger sample sizes. Parameter estimates were more sensitive to nonnormality than to sample size and estimation method. Chi-square was the least robust model fit index compared with Normed Fit Index, Nonnormed Fit Index, and Comparative Fit Index. Sample sizes of 100 or more are recommended for accurate parameter estimates.
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 Beginner's Guide to Structural Equation Modeling: Fourth Edition
Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (2015) · doi:10.4324/9781315749105 · Cited by 6,604
Self-citationA 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 · cited 3×
“ML, GLS, and asymptotically distribution free (ADF) are the most common estimators investigated in previous studies (Arminger & Rothe, 1993; Chou et al., 1991; Fan & Wang, 1998; Finch et al., 1997; Muthén, 1989; Muthén & Kaplan, 1985, 1992; Wang et al., 1995).”
BackgroundMethod
Cited by
Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM): An emerging tool in business research
F. Hair Jr, J., Sarstedt, M., Hopkins, L., & G. Kuppelwieser, V. (2014) · European Business Review · doi:10.1108/ebr-10-2013-0128 · Cited by 11,728
Basic psychological need satisfaction, need frustration, and need strength across four cultures
Chen, B., Vansteenkiste, M., Beyers, W., Boone, L., Deci, E. L., Van der Kaap-Deeder, J., Duriez, B., Lens, W., Matos, L., Mouratidis, A., et al. (2015) · Motivation and Emotion · doi:10.1007/s11031-014-9450-1 · Cited by 2,507
Structural equations modeling: Fit Indices, sample size, and advanced topics
Iacobucci, D. (2010) · Journal of Consumer Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jcps.2009.09.003 · Cited by 2,263
Peng, D. X., & Lai, F. (2012) · Journal of Operations Management · doi:10.1016/j.jom.2012.06.002 · Cited by 1,532
Krueger, R. F., Markon, K. E., Patrick, C. J., Benning, S. D., & Kramer, M. D. (2007) · Journal of Abnormal Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-843x.116.4.645 · Cited by 861
Metadata
- Authors
- Lei, M., & Lomax, R. G.
- Venue
- Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2005-01
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-27
- ISSN
- 1070-5511 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-8007
- OpenAlex
- W2090341320
- Cited by
- 704
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 24.59
- 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 Effect of Varying Degrees of Nonnormality in Structural Equation Modeling. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1207/s15328007sem1201_1
- The paper
- Lei, M., & Lomax, R. G. (2005). The Effect of Varying Degrees of Nonnormality in Structural Equation Modeling. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328007sem1201_1
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.
