Matching Items (5)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Structural equation modeling
- All Subjects: Confirmatory factor analysis
- Creators: Green, Samuel
Description
Possible selves researchers have uncovered many issues associated with the current possible selves measures. For instance, one of the most famous possible selves measures, Oyserman (2004)'s open-ended possible selves, has proven to be difficult to score reliably and also involves laborious scoring procedures. Therefore, this study was initiated to develop a close-ended measure, called the Persistent Academic Possible Selves Scale for Adolescents (PAPSS), that meets these challenges. The PAPSS integrates possible selves theories (personal and social identities) and educational psychology (self-regulation in social cognitive theory). Four hundred and ninety five junior high and high school students participated in the validation study of the PAPSS. I conducted confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) to compare fit for a baseline model to the hypothesized models using Mplus version 7 (Muthén & Muthén, 2012). A weighted least square means and a variance adjusted (WLSMV) estimation method was used for handling multivariate nonnormality of ordered categorical data. The final PAPSS has validity evidence based on the internal structure. The factor structure is composed of three goal-driven factors, one self-regulated factor that focuses on peers, and four self-regulated factors that emphasize the self. Oyserman (2004)'s open-ended questionnaire was used for exploring the evidence of convergent validity. Many issues regarding Oyserman (2003)'s instructions were found during the coding process of academic plausibility. It was complicated to detect hidden academic possible selves and strategies from non-academic possible selves and strategies. Also, interpersonal related strategies were over weighted in the scoring process compared to interpersonal related academic possible selves. The study results uncovered that all of the academic goal-related factors in the PAPSS are significantly related to academic plausibility in a positive direction. However, self-regulated factors in the PAPSS are not. The correlation results between the self-regulated factors and academic plausibility do not provide the evidence of convergent validity. Theoretical and methodological explanations for the test results are discussed.
ContributorsLee, Ji Eun (Author) / Husman, Jenefer (Thesis advisor) / Green, Samuel (Committee member) / Millsap, Roger (Committee member) / Brem, Sarah (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2013
Description
Lexical diversity (LD) has been used in a wide range of applications, producing a rich history in the field of speech-language pathology. However, for clinicians and researchers identifying a robust measure to quantify LD has been challenging. Recently, sophisticated techniques have been developed that assert to measure LD. Each one is based on its own theoretical assumptions and employs different computational machineries. Therefore, it is not clear to what extent these techniques produce valid scores and how they relate to each other. Further, in the field of speech-language pathology, researchers and clinicians often use different methods to elicit various types of discourse and it is an empirical question whether the inferences drawn from analyzing one type of discourse relate and generalize to other types. The current study examined a corpus of four types of discourse (procedures, eventcasts, storytelling, recounts) from 442 adults. Using four techniques (D; Maas; Measure of textual lexical diversity, MTLD; Moving average type token ratio, MATTR), LD scores were estimated for each type. Subsequently, data were modeled using structural equation modeling to uncover their latent structure. Results indicated that two estimation techniques (MATTR and MTLD) generated scores that were stronger indicators of the LD of the language samples. For the other two techniques, results were consistent with the presence of method factors that represented construct-irrelevant sources. A hierarchical factor analytic model indicated that a common factor underlay all combinations of types of discourse and estimation techniques and was interpreted as a general construct of LD. Two discourse types (storytelling and eventcasts) were significantly stronger indicators of the underlying trait. These findings supplement our understanding regarding the validity of scores generated by different estimation techniques. Further, they enhance our knowledge about how productive vocabulary manifests itself across different types of discourse that impose different cognitive and linguistic demands. They also offer clinicians and researchers a point of reference in terms of techniques that measure the LD of a language sample and little of anything else and also types of discourse that might be the most informative for measuring the LD of individuals.
ContributorsFergadiotis, Gerasimos (Author) / Wright, Heather H (Thesis advisor) / Katz, Richard (Committee member) / Green, Samuel (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2011
Description
This study presents a structural model of coping with dating violence. The model integrates abuse frequency and solution attribution to determine a college woman's choice of coping strategy. Three hundred, twenty-four undergraduate women reported being targets of some physical abuse from a boyfriend and responded to questions regarding the abuse, their gender role beliefs, their solution attribution and the coping behaviors they executed. Though gender role beliefs and abuse severity were not significant predictors, solution attribution mediated between frequency of the abuse and coping. Abuse frequency had a positive effect on external solution attribution and external solution attribution had a positive effect on the level of use of active coping, utilization of social support, denial and acceptance.
ContributorsBapat, Mona (Author) / Tracey, Terence J.G. (Thesis advisor) / Bernstein, Bianca (Committee member) / Green, Samuel (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2011
Description
Investigation of measurement invariance (MI) commonly assumes correct specification of dimensionality across multiple groups. Although research shows that violation of the dimensionality assumption can cause bias in model parameter estimation for single-group analyses, little research on this issue has been conducted for multiple-group analyses. This study explored the effects of mismatch in dimensionality between data and analysis models with multiple-group analyses at the population and sample levels. Datasets were generated using a bifactor model with different factor structures and were analyzed with bifactor and single-factor models to assess misspecification effects on assessments of MI and latent mean differences. As baseline models, the bifactor models fit data well and had minimal bias in latent mean estimation. However, the low convergence rates of fitting bifactor models to data with complex structures and small sample sizes caused concern. On the other hand, effects of fitting the misspecified single-factor models on the assessments of MI and latent means differed by the bifactor structures underlying data. For data following one general factor and one group factor affecting a small set of indicators, the effects of ignoring the group factor in analysis models on the tests of MI and latent mean differences were mild. In contrast, for data following one general factor and several group factors, oversimplifications of analysis models can lead to inaccurate conclusions regarding MI assessment and latent mean estimation.
ContributorsXu, Yuning (Author) / Green, Samuel (Thesis advisor) / Levy, Roy (Committee member) / Thompson, Marilyn (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
Description
A simulation study was conducted to explore the influence of partial loading invariance and partial intercept invariance on the latent mean comparison of the second-order factor within a higher-order confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) model. Noninvariant loadings or intercepts were generated to be at one of the two levels or both levels for a second-order CFA model. The numbers and directions of differences in noninvariant loadings or intercepts were also manipulated, along with total sample size and effect size of the second-order factor mean difference. Data were analyzed using correct and incorrect specifications of noninvariant loadings and intercepts. Results summarized across the 5,000 replications in each condition included Type I error rates and powers for the chi-square difference test and the Wald test of the second-order factor mean difference, estimation bias and efficiency for this latent mean difference, and means of the standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) and the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA).
When the model was correctly specified, no obvious estimation bias was observed; when the model was misspecified by constraining noninvariant loadings or intercepts to be equal, the latent mean difference was overestimated if the direction of the difference in loadings or intercepts of was consistent with the direction of the latent mean difference, and vice versa. Increasing the number of noninvariant loadings or intercepts resulted in larger estimation bias if these noninvariant loadings or intercepts were constrained to be equal. Power to detect the latent mean difference was influenced by estimation bias and the estimated variance of the difference in the second-order factor mean, in addition to sample size and effect size. Constraining more parameters to be equal between groups—even when unequal in the population—led to a decrease in the variance of the estimated latent mean difference, which increased power somewhat. Finally, RMSEA was very sensitive for detecting misspecification due to improper equality constraints in all conditions in the current scenario, including the nonzero latent mean difference, but SRMR did not increase as expected when noninvariant parameters were constrained.
When the model was correctly specified, no obvious estimation bias was observed; when the model was misspecified by constraining noninvariant loadings or intercepts to be equal, the latent mean difference was overestimated if the direction of the difference in loadings or intercepts of was consistent with the direction of the latent mean difference, and vice versa. Increasing the number of noninvariant loadings or intercepts resulted in larger estimation bias if these noninvariant loadings or intercepts were constrained to be equal. Power to detect the latent mean difference was influenced by estimation bias and the estimated variance of the difference in the second-order factor mean, in addition to sample size and effect size. Constraining more parameters to be equal between groups—even when unequal in the population—led to a decrease in the variance of the estimated latent mean difference, which increased power somewhat. Finally, RMSEA was very sensitive for detecting misspecification due to improper equality constraints in all conditions in the current scenario, including the nonzero latent mean difference, but SRMR did not increase as expected when noninvariant parameters were constrained.
ContributorsLiu, Yixing (Author) / Thompson, Marilyn (Thesis advisor) / Green, Samuel (Committee member) / Levy, Roy (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2016