Message/Author |
|
Xu, Man posted on Thursday, October 30, 2008 - 12:40 am
|
|
|
I am interested in the SEM only in the first level; however, if I need to take into account of the multilevel structure, is multilevel SEM the best way to do it, even if I am not really interested in level 2 results? (I assume that the SEM model on the second level should have the same model specification as the first level except for using group level indicators of the level 1 indicators for level 2 factors, constraining loadings to be the same as corresponding level 1 factors) Thank you! |
|
|
It is not likely that the between specification would be the same as the within specification. Usually there are fewer factors on between than within. You can explore the between-level factor structure using TYPE=TWOLEVEL EFA. |
|
Xu, Man posted on Wednesday, November 05, 2008 - 9:11 am
|
|
|
Thank you for your help. I guess I am trying to get a similar thing as in multilevel regression random intercept models. Could there be an analogue in multilevel SEM where the level 1 intercepts of each indicators are free for each cluster instead of having to specify something on the higher level? |
|
|
You can specify your SEM model on level 1 and covariances among the random intercepts on level 2. See Example 9.6. The between part would be: %BETWEEN% y1 WITH y2 y3 y4; y2 WITH y3 y4; y3 WITH y4; These WITH statements are covariances among the random intercepts. |
|
Xu, Man posted on Tuesday, November 11, 2008 - 3:36 am
|
|
|
Is allowing covariance at level 2 a strategy for increasing fit? Can I just leave the between bit empty? |
|
|
If you do not want to specify a particular model on the between level, it probably makes sense to have a saturated model. |
|
Back to top |