Kim Eun Sook, Cao Chunhua
a Department of Educational and Psychological Studies , University of South Florida.
Multivariate Behav Res. 2015;50(4):436-56. doi: 10.1080/00273171.2015.1021447.
Considering that group comparisons are common in social science, we examined two latent group mean testing methods when groups of interest were either at the between or within level of multilevel data: multiple-group multilevel confirmatory factor analysis (MG ML CFA) and multilevel multiple-indicators multiple-causes modeling (ML MIMIC). The performance of these methods were investigated through three Monte Carlo studies. In Studies 1 and 2, either factor variances or residual variances were manipulated to be heterogeneous between groups. In Study 3, which focused on within-level multiple-group analysis, six different model specifications were considered depending on how to model the intra-class group correlation (i.e., correlation between random effect factors for groups within cluster). The results of simulations generally supported the adequacy of MG ML CFA and ML MIMIC for multiple-group analysis with multilevel data. The two methods did not show any notable difference in the latent group mean testing across three studies. Finally, a demonstration with real data and guidelines in selecting an appropriate approach to multilevel multiple-group analysis are provided.
鉴于组间比较在社会科学中很常见,我们研究了两种潜在组均值检验方法,当感兴趣的组处于多水平数据的组间或组内水平时:多组多水平验证性因子分析(MG ML CFA)和多水平多指标多原因建模(ML MIMIC)。通过三项蒙特卡洛研究考察了这些方法的性能。在研究1和研究2中,因子方差或残差方差被操纵为组间异质。在专注于组内水平多组分析的研究3中,根据如何对组内相关(即聚类内组的随机效应因子之间的相关性)进行建模,考虑了六种不同的模型规格。模拟结果总体上支持MG ML CFA和ML MIMIC用于多水平数据的多组分析的充分性。在三项研究中,这两种方法在潜在组均值检验中没有显示出任何显著差异。最后,提供了一个真实数据演示以及选择多水平多组分析合适方法的指南。