» Articles » PMID: 36389589

Bifactor Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling: A Meta-analytic Review of Model Fit

Overview
Journal Front Psychol
Date 2022 Nov 17
PMID 36389589
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Multivariate behavioral research often focuses on latent constructs-such as motivation, self-concept, or wellbeing-that cannot be directly observed. Typically, these latent constructs are measured with items in standardized instruments. To test the factorial structure and multidimensionality of latent constructs in educational and psychological research, Morin et al. (2016a) proposed bifactor exploratory structural equation modeling (B-ESEM). This meta-analytic review (158 studies, = 308, = 778,624) aimed to estimate the extent to which B-ESEM model fit differs from other model representations, including confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM), hierarchical CFA, hierarchical ESEM, and bifactor-CFA. The study domains included learning and instruction, motivation and emotion, self and identity, depression and wellbeing, and interpersonal relations. The meta-analyzed fit indices were the χ ratio, the comparative fit index (CFI), the Tucker-Lewis index (TLI), the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), and the standardized root mean squared residual (SRMR). The findings of this meta-analytic review indicate that the B-ESEM model fit is superior to the fit of reference models. Furthermore, the results suggest that model fit is sensitive to sample size, item number, and the number of specific and general factors in a model.

Citing Articles

Validation of the Italian version of the Neuroception of Psychological Safety Scale (NPSS).

Poli A, Miccoli M Heliyon. 2024; 10(6):e27625.

PMID: 38533067 PMC: 10963227. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e27625.

References
1.
Nixon N, Guo B, Garland A, Kaylor-Hughes C, Nixon E, Morriss R . The bi-factor structure of the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale in persistent major depression; dimensional measurement of outcome. PLoS One. 2020; 15(10):e0241370. PMC: 7588071. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0241370. View

2.
Stanley T, Doucouliagos H . Neither fixed nor random: weighted least squares meta-regression. Res Synth Methods. 2016; 8(1):19-42. DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1211. View

3.
Rodrigues F, Cid L, Teixeira D, Monteiro D . Re-Applying the Basic Psychological Needs in Exercise Scale to Various Portuguese Exercise Groups: An Analysis of Bifactor Models and Contextual Invariance. Percept Mot Skills. 2021; 128(4):1660-1683. DOI: 10.1177/00315125211016803. View

4.
Morin A, Arens A, Tran A, Caci H . Exploring sources of construct-relevant multidimensionality in psychiatric measurement: A tutorial and illustration using the Composite Scale of Morningness. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2015; 25(4):277-288. PMC: 6860252. DOI: 10.1002/mpr.1485. View

5.
Sakakibara K, Shimazu A, Toyama H, Schaufeli W . Validation of the Japanese Version of the Burnout Assessment Tool. Front Psychol. 2020; 11:1819. PMC: 7431961. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01819. View