Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-n8gtw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-08T06:26:47.139Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Constructing a Covariance Matrix that Yields a Specified Minimizer and a Specified Minimum Discrepancy Function Value

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

Robert Cudeck  and
Michael W. Browne
Robert Cudeck*
Affiliation:
University of Minnesota
Michael W. Browne*
Affiliation:
Ohio State University
*
Requests for reprints or a copy of the computer program that implements this method should be sent to Robert Cudeck, Department of Psychology, University of Minnesota, 75 East River Road, Minneapolis, MN 55455,
Michael W. Browne, Departments of Psychology and Statistics, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A method is presented for constructing a covariance matrix Σ*0 that is the sum of a matrix Σ(γ0) that satisfies a specified model and a perturbation matrix,E, such that Σ*0=Σ(γ0) +E. The perturbation matrix is chosen in such a manner that a class of discrepancy functions F(Σ*0, Σ(γ0)), which includes normal theory maximum likelihood as a special case, has the prespecified parameter value γ0 as minimizer and a prespecified minimum δ A matrix constructed in this way seems particularly valuable for Monte Carlo experiments as the covariance matrix for a population in which the model does not hold exactly. This may be a more realistic conceptualization in many instances. An example is presented in which this procedure is employed to generate a covariance matrix among nonnormal, ordered categorical variables which is then used to study the performance of a factor analysis estimator.

Keywords

Monte Carlo experimentscovariance structure analysisfactor analysismodel misspecification

Information

Type
Original Paper
Information
Psychometrika , Volume 57 , Issue 3 , September 1992 , pp. 357 - 369
Copyright
Copyright © 1992 The Psychometric Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

We are grateful to Alexander Shapiro for suggesting the proof of the solution in section 2.

References

Browne, M. W. (1969). Fitting the factor analysis model. Psychometrika, 34, 375–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Browne, M. W. (1974). Generalized least-squares estimators in the analysis of covariance structures. South African Statistical Journal, 8, 1–24.Google Scholar
Gill, P. E., Murray, W., Wright, M. H. (1981). Practical optimization, San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Graham, A. (1981). Kronecker products and matrix calculus, with applications, London: Ellis Horwood.Google Scholar
Hakstian, A. R., Rogers, W. T., Cattell, R. B. (1982). The behavior of number-of-factors rules with simulated data. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 17, 193–219.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Huynh, H. (1978). Some approximate tests for repeated measurement designs. Psychometrika, 43, 161–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jöreskog, K. G. (1973). A general method for estimating a linear structural equation system. In Goldberger, A. S., Duncan, O. D. (Eds.), Structural equation models in the social sciences (pp. 85–112). New York: Seminar Press.Google Scholar
Kano, Y. (1986). Conditions for consistency of estimators in covariance structure models. Journal of the Japanese Statistical Society, 16, 75–80.Google Scholar
Laughlin, J. E. (1979). A Bayesian alternative to least squares and equal weighting coefficients in regression. Psychometrika, 44, 271–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muthén, B., Kaplan, D. (1985). A comparison of some methodologies for the factor analysis of non-normal Likert variables. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 38, 171–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nel, D. G. (1980). On matrix differentiation in statistics. South African Statistics Journal, 14, 137–193.Google Scholar
Shapiro, A., Browne, M. W. (1988). On the asymptotic bias of estimators under parameter drift. Statistics and Probability Letters, 7, 221–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thisted, R. A. (1988). Elements of statistical computing, New York: Chapman & Hall.Google Scholar
Tucker, L. R., Koopman, R. F., Linn, R. L. (1969). Evaluation of factor analytic research procedures by means of simulated correlation matrices. Psychometrika, 34, 421–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar