因果-形成指标建模的权重约束方法研究。

IF 4.6 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Behavior Research Methods Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-03-19 DOI:10.3758/s13428-024-02365-9
Ruoxuan Li, Lijuan Wang
{"title":"因果-形成指标建模的权重约束方法研究。","authors":"Ruoxuan Li, Lijuan Wang","doi":"10.3758/s13428-024-02365-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Causal-formative indicators are often used in social science research. To achieve identification in causal-formative indicator modeling, constraints need to be applied. A conventional method is to constrain the weight of a formative indicator to be 1. The selection of which indicator to have the fixed weight, however, may influence statistical inferences of the structural path coefficients from the causal-formative construct to outcomes. Another conventional method is to use equal weights (e.g., 1) and assumes that all indicators equally contribute to the latent construct, which can be a strong assumption. To address the limitations of the conventional methods, we proposed an alternative constraint method, in which the sum of the weights is constrained to be a constant. We analytically studied the relations and interpretations of structural path coefficients from the constraint methods, and the results showed that the proposed method yields better interpretations of path coefficients. Simulation studies were conducted to compare the performance of the weight constraint methods in causal-formative indicator modeling with one or two outcomes. Results showed that higher biases in the path coefficient estimates were observed from the conventional methods compared to the proposed method. The proposed method had ignorable bias and satisfactory coverage rates in the studied conditions. This study emphasizes the importance of using an appropriate weight constraint method in causal-formative indicator modeling.</p>","PeriodicalId":8717,"journal":{"name":"Behavior Research Methods","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Investigating weight constraint methods for causal-formative indicator modeling.\",\"authors\":\"Ruoxuan Li, Lijuan Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.3758/s13428-024-02365-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Causal-formative indicators are often used in social science research. To achieve identification in causal-formative indicator modeling, constraints need to be applied. A conventional method is to constrain the weight of a formative indicator to be 1. The selection of which indicator to have the fixed weight, however, may influence statistical inferences of the structural path coefficients from the causal-formative construct to outcomes. Another conventional method is to use equal weights (e.g., 1) and assumes that all indicators equally contribute to the latent construct, which can be a strong assumption. To address the limitations of the conventional methods, we proposed an alternative constraint method, in which the sum of the weights is constrained to be a constant. We analytically studied the relations and interpretations of structural path coefficients from the constraint methods, and the results showed that the proposed method yields better interpretations of path coefficients. Simulation studies were conducted to compare the performance of the weight constraint methods in causal-formative indicator modeling with one or two outcomes. Results showed that higher biases in the path coefficient estimates were observed from the conventional methods compared to the proposed method. The proposed method had ignorable bias and satisfactory coverage rates in the studied conditions. This study emphasizes the importance of using an appropriate weight constraint method in causal-formative indicator modeling.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8717,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Behavior Research Methods\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Behavior Research Methods\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-024-02365-9\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/3/19 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behavior Research Methods","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-024-02365-9","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

社会科学研究中经常使用因果形式指标。为了在因果-形成性指标模型中实现识别,需要应用一些约束条件。传统的方法是将形成性指标的权重限制为 1。然而,选择哪个指标具有固定权重可能会影响从因果-形成性构造到结果的结构路径系数的统计推断。另一种传统方法是使用等权重(如 1),并假设所有指标对潜在结构的贡献相同,这可能是一个很强的假设。为了解决传统方法的局限性,我们提出了另一种约束方法,即权重之和被约束为一个常数。我们分析研究了约束方法中结构路径系数的关系和解释,结果表明所提出的方法能更好地解释路径系数。模拟研究比较了权重约束方法在一个或两个结果的因果-形成指标模型中的性能。结果表明,与拟议方法相比,传统方法的路径系数估计值偏差更大。在研究条件下,拟议方法具有可忽略的偏差和令人满意的覆盖率。这项研究强调了在因果形式指标建模中使用适当权重约束方法的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Investigating weight constraint methods for causal-formative indicator modeling.

Causal-formative indicators are often used in social science research. To achieve identification in causal-formative indicator modeling, constraints need to be applied. A conventional method is to constrain the weight of a formative indicator to be 1. The selection of which indicator to have the fixed weight, however, may influence statistical inferences of the structural path coefficients from the causal-formative construct to outcomes. Another conventional method is to use equal weights (e.g., 1) and assumes that all indicators equally contribute to the latent construct, which can be a strong assumption. To address the limitations of the conventional methods, we proposed an alternative constraint method, in which the sum of the weights is constrained to be a constant. We analytically studied the relations and interpretations of structural path coefficients from the constraint methods, and the results showed that the proposed method yields better interpretations of path coefficients. Simulation studies were conducted to compare the performance of the weight constraint methods in causal-formative indicator modeling with one or two outcomes. Results showed that higher biases in the path coefficient estimates were observed from the conventional methods compared to the proposed method. The proposed method had ignorable bias and satisfactory coverage rates in the studied conditions. This study emphasizes the importance of using an appropriate weight constraint method in causal-formative indicator modeling.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.30
自引率
9.30%
发文量
266
期刊介绍: Behavior Research Methods publishes articles concerned with the methods, techniques, and instrumentation of research in experimental psychology. The journal focuses particularly on the use of computer technology in psychological research. An annual special issue is devoted to this field.
期刊最新文献
Publisher Correction: Dimensionality and optimal combination of autonomic fear-conditioning measures in humans. Author Correction: Discovering trends of social interaction behavior over time: An introduction to relational event modeling. Author Correction: r2mlm: An R package calculating R-squared measures for multilevel models. Correction: Development and validation of the Emotional Climate Change Stories (ECCS) stimuli set. Geofencing in location-based behavioral research: Methodology, challenges, and implementation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1