偶然误差及其对变量间关系测试和综合测量结果的影响。

IF 2.9 2区 心理学 Q1 MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS Psychometrika Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-04 DOI:10.1007/s11336-024-09980-7
Paul De Boeck, Michael L DeKay, Jolynn Pek
{"title":"偶然误差及其对变量间关系测试和综合测量结果的影响。","authors":"Paul De Boeck, Michael L DeKay, Jolynn Pek","doi":"10.1007/s11336-024-09980-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Wu and Browne (Psychometrika 80(3):571-600, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-015-9451-3 ; henceforth W &B) introduced the notion of adventitious error to explicitly take into account approximate goodness of fit of covariance structure models (CSMs). Adventitious error supposes that observed covariance matrices are not directly sampled from a theoretical population covariance matrix but from an operational population covariance matrix. This operational matrix is randomly distorted from the theoretical matrix due to differences in study implementations. W &B showed how adventitious error is linked to the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) and how the standard errors (SEs) of parameter estimates are augmented. Our contribution is to consider adventitious error as a general phenomenon and to illustrate its consequences. Using simulations, we illustrate that its impact on SEs can be generalized to pairwise relations between variables beyond the CSM context. Using derivations, we conjecture that heterogeneity of effect sizes across studies and overestimation of statistical power can both be interpreted as stemming from adventitious error. We also show that adventitious error, if it occurs, has an impact on the uncertainty of composite measurement outcomes such as factor scores and summed scores. The results of a simulation study show that the impact on measurement uncertainty is rather small although larger for factor scores than for summed scores. Adventitious error is an assumption about the data generating mechanism; the notion offers a statistical framework for understanding a broad range of phenomena, including approximate fit, varying research findings, heterogeneity of effects, and overestimates of power.</p>","PeriodicalId":54534,"journal":{"name":"Psychometrika","volume":" ","pages":"1055-1073"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11458726/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Adventitious Error and Its Implications for Testing Relations Between Variables and for Composite Measurement Outcomes.\",\"authors\":\"Paul De Boeck, Michael L DeKay, Jolynn Pek\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11336-024-09980-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Wu and Browne (Psychometrika 80(3):571-600, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-015-9451-3 ; henceforth W &B) introduced the notion of adventitious error to explicitly take into account approximate goodness of fit of covariance structure models (CSMs). Adventitious error supposes that observed covariance matrices are not directly sampled from a theoretical population covariance matrix but from an operational population covariance matrix. This operational matrix is randomly distorted from the theoretical matrix due to differences in study implementations. W &B showed how adventitious error is linked to the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) and how the standard errors (SEs) of parameter estimates are augmented. Our contribution is to consider adventitious error as a general phenomenon and to illustrate its consequences. Using simulations, we illustrate that its impact on SEs can be generalized to pairwise relations between variables beyond the CSM context. Using derivations, we conjecture that heterogeneity of effect sizes across studies and overestimation of statistical power can both be interpreted as stemming from adventitious error. We also show that adventitious error, if it occurs, has an impact on the uncertainty of composite measurement outcomes such as factor scores and summed scores. The results of a simulation study show that the impact on measurement uncertainty is rather small although larger for factor scores than for summed scores. Adventitious error is an assumption about the data generating mechanism; the notion offers a statistical framework for understanding a broad range of phenomena, including approximate fit, varying research findings, heterogeneity of effects, and overestimates of power.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54534,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychometrika\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1055-1073\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11458726/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychometrika\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-024-09980-7\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/4 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychometrika","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-024-09980-7","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

Wu 和 Browne(Psychometrika 80(3):571-600, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-015-9451-3; 以下简称 W &B)引入了偶然误差的概念,以明确考虑协方差结构模型(CSM)的近似拟合优度。偶然误差假设观测到的协方差矩阵不是直接从理论种群协方差矩阵中采样,而是从操作种群协方差矩阵中采样。由于研究实施的不同,该操作矩阵与理论矩阵之间存在随机扭曲。W & B 展示了偶然误差与均方根近似误差 (RMSEA) 的关系,以及参数估计的标准误差 (SE) 是如何增加的。我们的贡献在于将偶然误差视为一种普遍现象,并说明其后果。通过模拟,我们说明了偶然误差对标准误差的影响可以扩展到 CSM 范围之外的变量之间的成对关系。通过推导,我们推测不同研究之间效应大小的异质性和统计能力的高估都可以解释为源于偶然误差。我们还表明,偶然误差(如果发生)会对因子得分和总分等综合测量结果的不确定性产生影响。模拟研究的结果表明,对测量不确定性的影响相当小,但对因子得分的影响大于对总分的影响。偶然误差是对数据生成机制的一种假设;这一概念为理解各种现象提供了一个统计框架,这些现象包括近似拟合、不同的研究结果、效应的异质性以及对力量的高估。
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
Adventitious Error and Its Implications for Testing Relations Between Variables and for Composite Measurement Outcomes.

Wu and Browne (Psychometrika 80(3):571-600, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-015-9451-3 ; henceforth W &B) introduced the notion of adventitious error to explicitly take into account approximate goodness of fit of covariance structure models (CSMs). Adventitious error supposes that observed covariance matrices are not directly sampled from a theoretical population covariance matrix but from an operational population covariance matrix. This operational matrix is randomly distorted from the theoretical matrix due to differences in study implementations. W &B showed how adventitious error is linked to the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) and how the standard errors (SEs) of parameter estimates are augmented. Our contribution is to consider adventitious error as a general phenomenon and to illustrate its consequences. Using simulations, we illustrate that its impact on SEs can be generalized to pairwise relations between variables beyond the CSM context. Using derivations, we conjecture that heterogeneity of effect sizes across studies and overestimation of statistical power can both be interpreted as stemming from adventitious error. We also show that adventitious error, if it occurs, has an impact on the uncertainty of composite measurement outcomes such as factor scores and summed scores. The results of a simulation study show that the impact on measurement uncertainty is rather small although larger for factor scores than for summed scores. Adventitious error is an assumption about the data generating mechanism; the notion offers a statistical framework for understanding a broad range of phenomena, including approximate fit, varying research findings, heterogeneity of effects, and overestimates of power.

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
Psychometrika
Psychometrika 数学-数学跨学科应用
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
10.00%
发文量
72
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The journal Psychometrika is devoted to the advancement of theory and methodology for behavioral data in psychology, education and the social and behavioral sciences generally. Its coverage is offered in two sections: Theory and Methods (T& M), and Application Reviews and Case Studies (ARCS). T&M articles present original research and reviews on the development of quantitative models, statistical methods, and mathematical techniques for evaluating data from psychology, the social and behavioral sciences and related fields. Application Reviews can be integrative, drawing together disparate methodologies for applications, or comparative and evaluative, discussing advantages and disadvantages of one or more methodologies in applications. Case Studies highlight methodology that deepens understanding of substantive phenomena through more informative data analysis, or more elegant data description.
期刊最新文献
Correction to: Generalized Structured Component Analysis Accommodating Convex Components: A Knowledge-Based Multivariate Method with Interpretable Composite Indexes. Remarks from the Editor-in-Chief. Optimizing Large-Scale Educational Assessment with a "Divide-and-Conquer" Strategy: Fast and Efficient Distributed Bayesian Inference in IRT Models. Ordinal Outcome State-Space Models for Intensive Longitudinal Data. New Paradigm of Identifiable General-response Cognitive Diagnostic Models: Beyond Categorical Data.
×
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