Salīdzināt metodes
Apskatiet izvēlētās metodes blakus; rindas, kas atšķiras, ir izceltas.
| Daudzlīmeņu apstiprinošā faktoru analīze (MCFA)× | Apstiprinošā faktoru analīze (AFA)× | |
|---|---|---|
| Nozare | Psihometrija | Psihometrija |
| Saime | Latent structure | Latent structure |
| Izcelsmes gads≠ | 1994 | 1969 |
| Autors≠ | Bengt O. Muthen | Karl Gustav Jöreskog |
| Tips≠ | Latent variable model / measurement model | Hypothesis-testing latent variable model |
| Pirmavots≠ | Muthen, B. O. (1994). Multilevel covariance structure analysis. Sociological Methods & Research, 22(3), 376–398. DOI ↗ | Jöreskog, K. G. (1969). A general approach to confirmatory maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 34(2), 183–202. DOI ↗ |
| Citi nosaukumi | MCFA, multilevel measurement model, two-level CFA, hierarchical CFA | CFA, confirmatory FA, measurement model, restricted factor analysis |
| Saistītās≠ | 6 | 4 |
| Kopsavilkums≠ | Multilevel confirmatory factor analysis tests a pre-specified factor structure while simultaneously accounting for the non-independence of observations caused by clustered data. It decomposes item variance into within-group and between-group components, fitting a separate measurement model at each level, making it the standard tool for validating psychometric scales administered within natural groups such as classrooms, clinics, or organisations. | 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. |
| ScholarGateDatu kopa ↗ |
|
|