The golden rule is that there are no golden rules: A commentary on Paul Barrett’s recommendations for reporting model fit in structural equation modelling
- 31 May 2007
- journal article
- Published by Elsevier BV in Personality and Individual Differences
- Vol. 42 (5), 851-858
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.09.023
Abstract
No abstract availableThis publication has 14 references indexed in Scilit:
- Sensitivity of Fit Indexes to Misspecified Structural or Measurement Model Components: Rationale of Two-Index Strategy RevisitedStructural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 2005
- Simulation Study on Fit Indexes in CFA Based on Data With Slightly Distorted Simple StructureStructural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 2005
- Jiving the Four-Step, Waltzing Around Factor Analysis, and Other Serious FunStructural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 2000
- Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternativesStructural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 1999
- Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification.Psychological Methods, 1998
- The earth is round (p < .05).American Psychologist, 1994
- Causation issues in structural equation modeling researchStructural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 1994
- Statistical procedures and the justification of knowledge in psychological science.American Psychologist, 1989
- Goodness-of-fit indexes in confirmatory factor analysis: The effect of sample size.Psychological Bulletin, 1988
- Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures.Psychological Bulletin, 1980