2014
DOI: 10.1177/0013164414546566
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Type I and Type II Error Rates and Overall Accuracy of the Revised Parallel Analysis Method for Determining the Number of Factors

Abstract: Traditional parallel analysis (T-PA) estimates the number of factors by sequentially comparing sample eigenvalues with eigenvalues for randomly generated data. Revised parallel analysis (R-PA) sequentially compares the th eigenvalue for sample data to theth eigenvalue for generated data sets, conditioned on - 1 underlying factors. T-PA and R-PA are conceptualized as stepwise hypothesis-testing procedures and, thus, are alternatives to sequential likelihood ratio test (LRT) methods. We assessed the accuracy of … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

4
40
0
3

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 34 publications
(48 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
(48 reference statements)
4
40
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…The success rates in the four levels of critical eigenvalues were respectively 32.9%, 49.9%, 70.9%, and 87.3%. The overall success rate of 61% makes this version of MLFA more successful that PA, thus changing, with the current set of simulation conditions, the order observed by Green et al (2015). The improvements observed for the four levels of critical eigenvalues are, however, not large enough to bring MLFA to levels of success comparable to those of the NEST variants, which all respectively exceeded 50%, 70%, 85%, and 90%.…”
Section: CDmentioning
confidence: 87%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…The success rates in the four levels of critical eigenvalues were respectively 32.9%, 49.9%, 70.9%, and 87.3%. The overall success rate of 61% makes this version of MLFA more successful that PA, thus changing, with the current set of simulation conditions, the order observed by Green et al (2015). The improvements observed for the four levels of critical eigenvalues are, however, not large enough to bring MLFA to levels of success comparable to those of the NEST variants, which all respectively exceeded 50%, 70%, 85%, and 90%.…”
Section: CDmentioning
confidence: 87%
“…Their principal axis factoring model simply used the squared multiple correlation of each variable as communalities, without iterative improvement. The same authors (Green, Thompson, Levy, & Lo, 2015) later compared their own preferred version of R-PA, that based on PAFA, with the MLFA approach, reporting advantage for their own method.…”
Section: Candidate Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Thus, there are conflicting results from the eigenvalue approach and the scree plot approach. That is why a parallel analysis (Monte Carlo simulation) was developed to determine how many components this method suggests to retain (O’Connor, 2000; Green et al, 2015). Parallel analysis suggested nine factors above chance (see Supplementary Table S5 ).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%