Scinovex
articleTop 1% cited

Evaluation of goodness-of-fit indices for structural equation models.

Psychological Bulletin · 1989 · Vol. 105(3) · pp. 430–445
Stanley A. MulaikLarry R. JamesJudith Van AlstineNathan BennettS. C. LindC. Dean Stilwell

Abstract

Discusses how current goodness-of-fit indices fail to assess parsimony and hence disconfirmability of a model and are insensitive to misspecifications of causal relations (a) among latent variables when measurement model with many indicators is correct and (b) when causal relations corresponding to free parameters expected to be nonzero turn out to be zero or near zero. A discussion of philosophy of parsimony elucidates relations of parsimony to parameter estimation, disconfirmability, and goodness of fit. AGFI in LISREL is rejected. A method of adjusting goodness-of-fit indices by a parsimony ratio is described. Also discusses less biased estimates of goodness of fit and a relative normedfit index for testing fit of structural model exclusive of the measurement model. By a goodness-of-fit index, in structural equations modeling, we mean an index for assessing the fit of a model to data that ranges in possible value between zero and unity, with zero indicating a complete lack of fit and unity indicating perfect fit. Although chi-square statistics are often used as goodness-of-fit indices, they range between zero and infinity, with zero indicating perfect fit and a large number indicating extreme lack of fit. We prefer to call chi-square and other indices with this property lack-of-fit indices. For a recent discussion of both lack-of-fit and goodness-of-fit indices, see Wheaton (I 988). In this article we evaluate the use of goodness-of-fit indices for the assessment of the fit of structural equation models to data. Our aim is to review their rationales and to assess their strengths and weaknesses. We also consider other aspects of the problem of evaluating a structural equation model with goodness-of-fit indices. For example, are certain goodness-of-fit indices to be used only in certain stages of research (a contention of Sobel & Bohrnstedt, 1985)? Or, how biased are estimates of goodness of fit in small samples? What bearing does parsimony have on assessing the goodness of fit of the model? Can goodness-of-fit indices focus on the fit of certain aspects of a model as opposed to the fit of the overall model? For example, to what extent do current goodness-of-fit indices fail to reveal poor fits in the structural submodel among the latent variables because of good fits in the measurement model relating latent variables to manifest indicators? We describe a goodness-of-fit index now

Psychometric Methodologies and TestingMulti-Criteria Decision MakingGoodness of fitStructural equation modelingStatisticsEconometricsMathematicsPsychology
Citations
2,838
FWCI
68.52
field-weighted impact
References
39
Percentile
100%
vs. same field & year
Citations per year
Cited by
CB-SEM vs PLS-SEM methods for research in social sciences and technology forecasting
Technological Forecasting and Social Change · 2021 · 2,085 citations
Is perfectionism good, bad, or both? Examining models of the perfectionism construct
Personality and Individual Differences · 2003 · 613 citations
Development and Validation of the Political Skill Inventory
Journal of Management · 2005 · 1,349 citations
The Commitment-Trust Theory of Relationship Marketing
Journal of Marketing · 1994 · 17,406 citations
Innovation, organizational capabilities, and the born-global firm
Journal of International Business Studies · 2004 · 2,933 citations
Chi‐square for model fit in confirmatory factor analysis
Journal of Advanced Nursing · 2020 · 487 citations
References
Time Series: Theory and Methods
Technometrics · 1992 · 5,091 citations
Citation Network

How this paper connects to the literature. Drag to explore, click any node to open that paper.