Researchers must make numerous choices when conducting factor analyses, each of which can have significant ramifications on the model results. They must decide on an appropriate sample size to achieve accurate parameter estimates and adequate power, a factor model and estimation method, a method for determining the number of factors and evaluating model fit, and a rotation criterion. Unfortunately, researchers continue to use outdated methods in each of these areas. The present article provides a current overview of these areas in an effort to provide researchers with up-to-date methods and considerations in both exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. A demonstration was provided to illustrate current approaches. Choosing between confirmatory and exploratory methods is also discussed, as researchers often make incorrect assumptions about the application of each.

The Differentiation of Self Inventory (DSI) is a multidimensional measure of differentiation consisting of four subscales focusing on adults (ages 25+), and their significant relationships, including current relationships with family of origin. Although the DSI full scale and three of its subscales are theoretically and psychometrically sound, the Fusion with Others (FO) subscale is lacking. Therefore, responses of 225 adults were used to revise the FO subscale. Results yielded a 12-item, revised FO subscale with improved internal consistency reliability and construct validity. Greater fusion with others was associated with greater spousal fusion and dimensions of adult attachment insecurity. Implications for Bowen theory and suggestions for future research with the DSI-R are discussed.

No abstract

Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) has long been used in the social sciences to depict the relationships between variables/items and latent traits. Researchers face many choices when using EFA, including the choice of rotation criterion, which can be difficult given that few research articles have discussed and/or demonstrated their differences. The goal of the current study is to help fill this gap by reviewing and demonstrating the utility of several rotation criteria. Furthermore, this article discusses and demonstrates the importance of using factor pattern loading standard errors for hypothesis testing. The choice of a rotation criterion and the use of standard errors in evaluating factor loadings are essential so researchers can make informed decisions concerning the factor structure. This study demonstrates that depending on the rotation criterion selected, and the complexity of the factor pattern matrix, the interfactor correlations and factor pattern loadings can vary substantially. It is also illustrated that the magnitude of the factor loading standard errors can result in different factor structures. Implications and future directions are discussed.

Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) is a commonly used statistical technique for examining the relationships between variables (e.g., items) and the factors (e.g., latent traits) they depict. There are several decisions that must be made when using EFA, with one of the more important being choice of the rotation criterion. This selection can be arduous given the numerous rotation criteria available and the lack of research/literature that compares their function and utility. Historically, researchers have chosen rotation criteria based on whether or not factors are correlated and have failed to consider other important aspects of their data. This study reviews several rotation criteria, demonstrates how they may perform with different factor pattern structures, and highlights for researchers subtle but important differences between each rotation criterion. The choice of rotation criterion is critical to ensure researchers make informed decisions as to when different rotation criteria may or may not be appropriate. The results suggest that depending on the rotation criterion selected and the complexity of the factor pattern matrix, the interpretation of the interfactor correlations and factor pattern loadings can vary substantially. Implications and future directions are discussed.