

Secondorder CFA among multiple groups 

Message/Author 


Hi, I am working on a project about comparing secondorder CFA between two groups. Suppose there are four constructs x, y,z, m x has several measurement scales, x1, x2,x 3,.... y has several measurement scales, y1, y2, y3..... z has several measurement scales, z1, z2, z3,.... I also link m (no measurement scale)> x, m> y, m>z. Because it is the secondorder CFA, among three paths m>x,m>y, m>z, one of them has to be restricted to 1. When I compare the secondorder CFA, how can I compare the path that is already restricted to 1? Suppose the path m>x is restricted to 1. After I compare the path m>y, m>z, can I free the path m>z, but restrict m>y as 1. And then I compare the path m>x. Is it possible? Thank you very much for your help. It is really helpful for me! 


Free all of the factor loadings for the secondorder factor and set its metric by fixing the factor variance to one. 


Hi Dr. Muthen – I wanted to examine a second order CFA component prior to testing my larger SEM model. One of my construct is given below: USEVARIABLES ARE X1X12; CATEGORICAL ARE X1X12; MISSING ARE ALL (99); MODEL: F1 BY X1 X2; F2 BY X3 X4; F3 BY X5X8; F4 BY X9X12; F5 BY F1 F2 F3 F4; OUTPUT: Standardized; modindices; It’s failing to provide estimates since the number of iterations exceeded and no convergence was achieved. Is the problem caused by the fact that F1 and F2 have only two firstorder factor indicators? A colleague ran the same model in AMOS which provided various estimates and fit statistics. Although the output appeared normal, I was concerned that the estimator used was MLE while in the presence of ordinal indictors. I am currently running Mplus version 6.0. Any insight or suggestions would be much appreciated. 


Please send the full output and your license number to support@statmodel.com so I can see why the model did not converge. 

Back to top 

