Eid Michael, Nussbeck Fridtjof W, Geiser Christian, Cole David A, Gollwitzer Mario, Lischetzke Tanja
Department of Psychology, Free University of Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Psychol Methods. 2008 Sep;13(3):230-53. doi: 10.1037/a0013219.
The question as to which structural equation model should be selected when multitrait-multimethod (MTMM) data are analyzed is of interest to many researchers. In the past, attempts to find a well-fitting model have often been data-driven and highly arbitrary. In the present article, the authors argue that the measurement design (type of methods used) should guide the choice of the statistical model to analyze the data. In this respect, the authors distinguish between (a) interchangeable methods, (b) structurally different methods, and (c) the combination of both kinds of methods. The authors present an appropriate model for each type of method. All models allow separating measurement error from trait influences and trait-specific method effects. With respect to interchangeable methods, a multilevel confirmatory factor model is presented. For structurally different methods, the correlated trait-correlated (method-1) model is recommended. Finally, the authors demonstrate how to appropriately analyze data from MTMM designs that simultaneously use interchangeable and structurally different methods. All models are applied to empirical data to illustrate their proper use. Some implications and guidelines for modeling MTMM data are discussed.
在分析多特质-多方法(MTMM)数据时应选择哪种结构方程模型的问题,引起了许多研究者的兴趣。过去,寻找拟合良好模型的尝试往往是由数据驱动的,而且非常随意。在本文中,作者认为测量设计(所使用方法的类型)应指导用于分析数据的统计模型的选择。在这方面,作者区分了(a)可互换方法、(b)结构不同的方法以及(c)这两种方法的组合。作者针对每种方法类型提出了一个合适的模型。所有模型都允许将测量误差与特质影响以及特质特定的方法效应区分开来。对于可互换方法,提出了一个多层次验证性因素模型。对于结构不同的方法,推荐相关特质-相关(方法-1)模型。最后,作者展示了如何对同时使用可互换和结构不同方法的MTMM设计的数据进行适当分析。所有模型都应用于实证数据以说明其正确用法。讨论了一些对MTMM数据建模的启示和指导原则。