244 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23834417)
1. Why item parcels are (almost) never appropriate: two wrongs do not make a right--camouflaging misspecification with item parcels in CFA models.
Marsh HW; Lüdtke O; Nagengast B; Morin AJ; Von Davier M
Psychol Methods; 2013 Sep; 18(3):257-84. PubMed ID: 23834417
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. A new look at the big five factor structure through exploratory structural equation modeling.
Marsh HW; Lüdtke O; Muthén B; Asparouhov T; Morin AJ; Trautwein U; Nagengast B
Psychol Assess; 2010 Sep; 22(3):471-91. PubMed ID: 20822261
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Exploratory structural equation modeling: an integration of the best features of exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis.
Marsh HW; Morin AJ; Parker PD; Kaur G
Annu Rev Clin Psychol; 2014; 10():85-110. PubMed ID: 24313568
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Testing the Factor Structure and Measurement Invariance Across Gender of the Big Five Inventory Through Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling.
Chiorri C; Marsh HW; Ubbiali A; Donati D
J Pers Assess; 2016; 98(1):88-99. PubMed ID: 25932664
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Measurement invariance of big-five factors over the life span: ESEM tests of gender, age, plasticity, maturity, and la dolce vita effects.
Marsh HW; Nagengast B; Morin AJS
Dev Psychol; 2013 Jun; 49(6):1194-1218. PubMed ID: 22250996
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Exploratory structural equation modeling of personality data.
Booth T; Hughes DJ
Assessment; 2014 Jun; 21(3):260-71. PubMed ID: 24682748
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. An Illustration of the Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling (ESEM) Framework on the Passion Scale.
Tóth-Király I; Bõthe B; Rigó A; Orosz G
Front Psychol; 2017; 8():1968. PubMed ID: 29163325
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Longitudinal tests of competing factor structures for the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale: traits, ephemeral artifacts, and stable response styles.
Marsh HW; Scalas LF; Nagengast B
Psychol Assess; 2010 Jun; 22(2):366-81. PubMed ID: 20528064
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. A Comparison of Reliability Estimation Based on Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Exploratory Structural Equation Models.
Fu Y; Wen Z; Wang Y
Educ Psychol Meas; 2022 Apr; 82(2):205-224. PubMed ID: 35185157
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Why the items versus parcels controversy needn't be one.
Little TD; Rhemtulla M; Gibson K; Schoemann AM
Psychol Methods; 2013 Sep; 18(3):285-300. PubMed ID: 23834418
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Investigating the Dimensionality of Early Numeracy Using the Bifactor Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling Framework.
Dierendonck C; de Chambrier AF; Fagnant A; Luxembourger C; Tinnes-Vigne M; Poncelet D
Front Psychol; 2021; 12():680124. PubMed ID: 34239484
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling (ESEM), and Set-ESEM: Optimal Balance Between Goodness of Fit and Parsimony.
Marsh HW; Guo J; Dicke T; Parker PD; Craven RG
Multivariate Behav Res; 2020; 55(1):102-119. PubMed ID: 31204844
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. [Confirmatory factor analysis of the short French version of the Center for Epidemiological Studies of Depression Scale (CES-D10) in adolescents].
Cartierre N; Coulon N; Demerval R
Encephale; 2011 Sep; 37(4):273-7. PubMed ID: 21981887
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale: a bifactor answer to a two-factor question?
McKay MT; Boduszek D; Harvey SA
J Pers Assess; 2014; 96(6):654-60. PubMed ID: 24940657
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. A comparison of confirmatory factor analysis and multidimensional Rasch models to investigate the dimensionality of test-taking motivation.
Demars CE
J Appl Meas; 2013; 14(2):179-96. PubMed ID: 23816595
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. The NEO Personality Inventory-Revised: factor structure and gender invariance from exploratory structural equation modeling analyses in a high-stakes setting.
Furnham A; Guenole N; Levine SZ; Chamorro-Premuzic T
Assessment; 2013 Feb; 20(1):14-23. PubMed ID: 22837539
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. How should the internal structure of personality inventories be evaluated?
Hopwood CJ; Donnellan MB
Pers Soc Psychol Rev; 2010 Aug; 14(3):332-46. PubMed ID: 20435808
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Cross-cultural validity and measurement invariance of the social physique anxiety scale in five European nations.
Hagger MS; Aşçi FH; Lindwall M; Hein V; Mülazimoğlu-Balli O; Tarrant M; Ruiz YP; Sell V
Scand J Med Sci Sports; 2007 Dec; 17(6):703-19. PubMed ID: 17346291
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Confirmatory factor analysis of the M5-50: an implementation of the International Personality Item Pool item set.
Socha A; Cooper CA; McCord DM
Psychol Assess; 2010 Mar; 22(1):43-9. PubMed ID: 20230150
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A combined-method psychometric analysis recommended modification of the multidimensional health locus of control scales.
Kelly PA; Kallen MA; Suárez-Almazor ME
J Clin Epidemiol; 2007 May; 60(5):440-7. PubMed ID: 17419954
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
