Bandingkan metode
Tinjau metode pilihan Anda berdampingan; baris yang berbeda akan disorot.
| Model Bifaktor (Faktor Umum dan Spesifik)× | Analisis Faktor Konfirmatori (CFA)× | |
|---|---|---|
| Bidang | Psikometri | Psikometri |
| Keluarga | Latent structure | Latent structure |
| Tahun asal≠ | 1937 | 1969 |
| Pencetus≠ | Holzinger & Swineford (1937); modern revival by Reise (2012) | Karl Gustav Jöreskog |
| Tipe≠ | Confirmatory latent variable model | Hypothesis-testing latent variable model |
| Sumber perintis≠ | Reise, S. P. (2012). The Rediscovery of Bifactor Measurement Models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 47(5), 667–696. DOI ↗ | Jöreskog, K. G. (1969). A general approach to confirmatory maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 34(2), 183–202. DOI ↗ |
| Alias | Bifaktör Modeli — Genel ve Spesifik Faktörler, hierarchical factor model, general-specific factor model, Schmid-Leiman model | CFA, confirmatory FA, measurement model, restricted factor analysis |
| Terkait≠ | 6 | 4 |
| Ringkasan≠ | The bifactor measurement model specifies that every indicator loads simultaneously on a single general factor and on one of several specific (group) factors. Formally introduced by Holzinger and Swineford in 1937 and brought into mainstream psychometrics by Reise (2012), it is now the standard tool for evaluating whether a multidimensional scale can legitimately yield a single composite score. | Confirmatory factor analysis tests a researcher-specified factor structure against observed data. Unlike exploratory approaches, the researcher decides in advance which indicators load on which latent factor, and the model is evaluated by how closely the implied covariance matrix reproduces the sample covariance matrix. CFA is central to scale validation, construct validity assessment, and measurement invariance testing. |
| ScholarGateSet data ↗ |
|
|