Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-t6st2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-03-28T12:46:34.157Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Non-parametric Regression Among Factor Scores: Motivation and Diagnostics for Nonlinear Structural Equation Models

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

Steffen Grønneberg*
Affiliation:
BI Norwegian Business School
Julien Patrick Irmer
Affiliation:
Goethe University Frankfurt
*
Correspondence should be made to Steffen Grønneberg, Department of Economics, BI Norwegian Business School, Oslo 0484, Norway. Email: steffeng@gmail.com
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We provide a framework for motivating and diagnosing the functional form in the structural part of nonlinear or linear structural equation models when the measurement model is a correctly specified linear confirmatory factor model. A mathematical population-based analysis provides asymptotic identification results for conditional expectations of a coordinate of an endogenous latent variable given exogenous and possibly other endogenous latent variables, and theoretically well-founded estimates of this conditional expectation are suggested. Simulation studies show that these estimators behave well compared to presently available alternatives. Practically, we recommend the estimator using Bartlett factor scores as input to classical non-parametric regression methods.

Information

Type
Theory & Methods
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Copyright
Copyright © 2024 The Author(s)
Figure 0

Table 1 Assumptions used

Figure 1

Figure 1 A comparison of the exact densities of \documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$r_\xi $$\end{document} resulting from the corresponding distribution of εx\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$\varepsilon _x$$\end{document} with the relevant normal distribution suggested as an approximation.

Figure 2

Figure 2 A comparison of nonparametric estimation for E[η|ξ]\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$ \mathbb {E} [\eta | \xi ]$$\end{document} averaged across 200 replications with n=1000\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$n=1000$$\end{document} for the LOESS and the smoothed spline methods based on BFS and the NLFS, the HZ-estimator, the BSpline estimator based on NLFS compared to the true trend and a linear SEM estimation with different true trends (quadratic, cubic, logit and piecewise linear) and dimensions dx\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$d_x$$\end{document} with normal ξ\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$\xi $$\end{document} and gamma distributed errors ε\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$\varepsilon $$\end{document}.

Figure 3

Figure 3 A comparison of the average MISE across 200 replications with n=1000\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$n=1000$$\end{document} for different procedures [(B)Splines vs. LOESS vs. HZ/others] based on different inputs (BFS \documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$\ddot{f}$$\end{document}, NLFS, the linear SEM, and the true latent variables f for comparison) for different dimensions dx\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$d_x$$\end{document} aggregated across all distributions and trends used in the simulation study.

Figure 4

Figure 4 A comparison of the averaged MISE across 200 replications with n=1000\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$n=1000$$\end{document} for different procedures [(B)Splines vs. LOESS vs. HZ/others] based on different inputs (BFS, NLFS, linear SEM, and true latent variables f for comparison) for four models with different true trends (quadratic, cubic, logit and piecewise linear) and dimensions dx\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$d_x$$\end{document}. See Table 8 and 9 in Appendix D.4 in the online supplementary material for numerical values.

Figure 5

Figure 5 A comparison of the averaged MISE across 200 replications with n=1000\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$n=1000$$\end{document} for different procedures [(B)Splines vs. LOESS vs. HZ/others] based on different inputs (BFS \documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$\ddot{f}$$\end{document}, NLFS, the linear SEM, and the true latent variables f for comparison) for different dimensions dx\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$d_x$$\end{document} aggregated across all distributions and trends used in the simulation study separated for conditions without (uncrossed) and including cross-loadings and cross correlations in Λx,Ψx,\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$\Lambda _x, \Psi _x,$$\end{document} and Ψy\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$\Psi _y$$\end{document}. BFS and BFSuc\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$_\text {uc}$$\end{document} are equivalent for uncrossed data.

Figure 6

Figure 6 A comparison of the averaged MISE across 200 replications with n=1000\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$n=1000$$\end{document} for different procedures [(B)Splines vs. LOESS vs. HZ/others] based on different inputs (BFS, NLFS, linear SEM, and true latent variables f for comparison) for two models with different true trends (quadratic and cubic), dimensions dxj\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$d_{x_j}$$\end{document}, and inclusion of cross-relations (cross-loadings and cross-correlations in Λx,Ψx,\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$\Lambda _x, \Psi _x,$$\end{document} and Ψy\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$\Psi _y$$\end{document}) and distributions (row and column names refer to marginal distributions) used in the simulation study for dξ=2\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$d_\xi = 2$$\end{document}. See Table 12 and 13 in Appendix D.4 in the online supplementary material for numerical values.

Supplementary material: File

Grønneberg and Irmer Supplementary material

Grønneberg and Irmer Supplementary material
Download Grønneberg and Irmer Supplementary material(File)
File 5.1 MB