Xu, Man posted on Friday, January 18, 2013 - 6:34 am
Continued from the previous post (sorry!).
For this model, the growth parameters (i, s) seem close enough to those from ex6.14, df was same although fit was not exactly the same - similar though.
Now, my question is about measurement invariance (MI) under this specification. I gather that if this LST growth model is what I want. Then it is probably no longer suitable to start the MI tests based on the CFA with free means (as taught in Topic 4), because the LST growth model specification is like a bi-factor (maybe depends on the schmid-leiman transformation too?).
Now, I was wondering if it is better if in this model, I free up the loadings of the slope from one of the three waves? Like s by y11@0y21@0y31@0y12@1y22@1y32@1 y13* y23* y33*
Would this then allow a better model for testing MI, especially for the item intercepts (a free latent mean structure, without linear restriction on the slope)?
Xu, Man posted on Friday, January 18, 2013 - 6:56 am
Oh, I should have constrained the last three loading menas equal, like: