PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
January 1, 20039,045 citationsOpen Access

Evaluating the Fit of Structural Equation Models: Tests of Significance and Descriptive Goodness-of-Fit Measures

View Full Paper
KSKarin Schermelleh-EngelHMHelfried MoosbruggerHMH. G. Müller

Key Points

  • To provide applied researchers with practical guidelines for evaluating model adequacy and interpreting conflicting goodness-of-fit indices in structural equation modeling.
  • Reviewed parameter estimation methods, specifically maximum likelihood (ML) and weighted least squares (WLS), in relation to fit assessment.
  • Analyzed the characteristics, behavior, and recommendations for common descriptive goodness-of-fit indices and significance tests.
  • Generated an artificial dataset from a known baseline model to evaluate fit across two correctly specified and two misspecified models.
  • Goodness-of-fit indices frequently yield conflicting evaluations regarding how well a structural equation model matches empirical data.
  • Fit index performance and interpretation depend directly on the chosen parameter estimation framework, such as ML or WLS.
  • Simulations of correctly specified and misspecified models provide practical benchmarks for distinguishing between poor, adequate, and good model fit.

Abstract

For structural equation models, a huge variety of fit indices has been developed. These indices, however, can point to conflicting conclusions about the extent to which a model actually matches the observed data. The present article provides some guidelines that should help applied researchers to evaluate the adequacy of a given structural equation model. First, as goodness-of-fit measures depend on the method used for parameter estimation, maximum likelihood (ML) and weighted least squares (WLS) methods are introduced in the context of structural equation modeling. Then, the most common goodness-of-fit indices are discussed and some recommendations for practitioners given. Finally, we generated an artificial data set according to a "true" model and analyzed two misspecified and two correctly specified models as examples of poor model fit, adequate fit, and good fit.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Schermelleh-Engel et al. (2003) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69d6fa2099397875bbaa7f79https://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.12784
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper