Message/Author |
|
anon9210 posted on Sunday, March 27, 2011 - 1:38 pm
|
|
|
Hi, I am running some EFAs for a couple of large datasets with Ns > 3000 and > 5000, respectively. I noticed that despite the large Ns, when I run EFAs with these datasets, I sometimes get results with interfactor correlations that are not significant. The parameter estimates look normal. I understand what's happening computationally - i.e., that the factor correlations estimated by the model are relatively small and/or standard errors are relatively large. But, in some cases I get a correlation of approx .20 between factors, it's hard to believe that it is not significant given the size of my sample. How would I interpret this practically in relation to the data - e.g., that there are a few people in the dataset that are driving these correlations between factors? Also, just to double-check, I generated factor scores using ESEM and tried using a regular Pearson correlation. These are generally larger in magnitude than the EFA factor correlations in Mplus. However, even rs of about .06 or .07 end up statistically significant. So, would I be right in assuming that the meaning of this statistical significance is very different from the EFA factor correlation significance? Thanks for your help in advance. |
|
|
Please send the input, data, outputs and your license number to support@statmodel.com. |
|
Sean Delaney posted on Saturday, February 04, 2012 - 7:31 am
|
|
|
Hello, I did an EFA using Mplus and it calculated the promax factor correlations. I wish to report on the 3-factor solution and on the correlations among the factors. A journal reviewer has asked me to state if the correlation among the factors is significant. I would be grateful if you could tell me where in the output table I can find the significance of the correlations. I have tried, unsuccessfully, to find this in the OUTPUT command chapter. Thank you. |
|
|
These values are given in the output. First come the estimates of the correlations, then the standard errors, and then the ratio which is a z-test in large samples. |
|
Sean Delaney posted on Saturday, February 04, 2012 - 10:31 am
|
|
|
Thanks for your speedy reply. My output seems to be different. In the section of the Output under the heading "EXPLORATORY FACTOR ANALYSIS WITH THREE FACTORS" the headings I have are the "RMS Residual," "Promax Rotated Loadings," "Promax Factor Correlations," "Estimated Residual Variances" (for each item), "Factor Structure" and "Factor Determinances." I can't find the standard errors or the ratio of the correlations. I have noted the Promax Factor Correlations in the article and the reviewer wants me to state the significance of the correlations among the factors. I am not sure where to find that information or if I need to change my commands to get them. I am using an older version of MPlus (version 5). |
|
|
These values have been available for some time. It sounds like they were not available in Version 5. |
|
H Steen posted on Wednesday, May 15, 2013 - 8:04 am
|
|
|
Hi Linda, If doing a CFA with WLSMV estimator, are the correlations between factors still pearson correlations, or a different type? Thank you very much in advance. |
|
|
Factors are continuous variables. Correlations among continuous variables are Pearson correlations. |
|
|
Hi, I'm using version 6, and it seems that significance of factor correlations are not stated in my EFA output, as per Sean's post. May I know how can I calculate them myself? Thank you. |
|
|
That is very complex and can only be done using a computer program with matrix algebra. It is better to get Mplus Version 7.31. |
|
Back to top |