Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Model comparison of nonlinear structural equation models with fixed covariates

  • Articles
  • Published:
Psychometrika Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Recently, it has been recognized that the commonly used linear structural equation model is inadequate to deal with some complicated substantive theory. A new nonlinear structural equation model with fixed covariates is proposed in this article. A procedure, which utilizes the powerful path sampling for computing the Bayes factor, is developed for model comparison. In the implementation, the required random observations are simulated via a hybrid algorithm that combines the Gibbs sampler and the Metropolis-Hastings algorithm. It is shown that the proposed procedure is efficient and flexible; and it produces Bayesian estimates of the parameters, latent variables, and their highest posterior density intervals as by-products. Empirical performances of the proposed procedure such as sensitivity to prior inputs are illustrated by a simulation study and a real example.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Albert, J.H., & Chib, S. (1993). Bayesian analysis of binary and polychotomous response data.Journal of the American Statistical Association, 88, 669–679.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arminger, G., & Muthén, B.O. (1998). A Bayesian approach to nonlinear latent variable models using the Gibbs sampler and the Metropolis-Hastings algorithm.Psychometrika, 63, 271–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bagozzi, R.P., Baumgartner, H., & Yi, Y. (1992). State versus action orientation and the theory of reasoned action: An application to coupon usage.Journal of Consumer Research, 18, 505–517.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bayarri, M.J., & Berger, J.O. (2000). P values for composite null models.Journal of the American Statistical Association, 95, 1127–1142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bentler, P.M. (1983). Some contributions to efficient statistics for structural models: Specification and estimation of moment structures.Psychometrika, 48, 493–517.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bentler, P.M. (1992).EQS: Structural equation program manual. Los Angeles, CA: BMDP Statistical Software.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bentler, P.M., & Dudgeon, P. (1996). Covariance structure analysis: Statistical practice, theory and direction.Annual Review of Psychology, 47, 541–570.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berger, J.O. (1985)Statistical decision theory and Bayesian analysis. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bollen, K.A. & Long, J.S. (1993).Testing structural equation models. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bollen, K.A., & Paxton, P. (1998). Two-stage least squares estimation of interaction effects. In R.E. Schumacker & G.A. Marcoulides (Eds.),Interaction and nonlinear effects in structural equation models (pp. 125–151). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Broemeling, L.D. (1985).Bayesian analysis of linear models. New York, NY: Marcel Dekker.

    Google Scholar 

  • Browne, M.W. (1984). A symptotic distribution-free methods for the analysis of covariance structures.British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 37, 62–83.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Busemeyer, J.R., & Jones, L.E. (1983). Analysis of multiplicative combination rules when the causal variables are measured with error.Psychological Bulletin, 93, 549–562.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlin, B.P., & Louis, T.A. (1996).Bayes and Empirical Bayes Methods for Data Analysis. Chapman and Hall.

  • Casella, G. & Berger, R.L. (1990).Statistical inference. Belmont, CA: Duxbury Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, M.H., & Shao, Q.M. (1999). Monte Carlo estimation of Bayesian credible and HPD intervals.Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics, 8, 69–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, M.H., Shao, Q.M., & Ibrahim, J.G. (2000).Monte Carlo methods in Bayesian computation. New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chib, S. (1995). Marginal likelihood from the Gibbs output.Journal of the American Statistical Association, 90, 1313–1321.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiCiccio, T.J., Kass, R.E., Raftery, A., & Wasserman, L. (1997). Computing Bayes factors by combining simulation and asymptotic approximations.Journal of the American Statistical Association, 92, 903–915.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunson, D.B. (2000). Bayesian latent variable models for clustered mixed outcomes.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B,62, 355–366.

    Google Scholar 

  • Everitt, B.S. (1984).An introduction to latent variable models. London: Chapman and Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gelfand, A.E., & Dey, D.K. (1994). Bayesian model choice: Asymptotic and exact calculations.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B,56, 501–514.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gelman, A., & Meng, X. L. (1998). Simulating normalizing constant: From importance sampling to bridge sampling to path sampling.Statistical Science, 13, 163–185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gelman, A. & Rubin, D.B. (1992). Inference from iterative simulation using multiple sequence (with discussion).Statistical Science, 7, 457–472.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gelman, A., Meng, X.L., & Stern, H (1996). Posterior predictive assessment of model fitness via realized discrepancies.Statistica Sinica, 6, 733–807.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gelman, A., Roberts, G.O., & Gilks, W.R. (1995). Efficient Metropolis jumping rules. In J.M. Bernardo, J.O. Berger, A.P. Dawid & A.F.M. Smith (Eds.),Bayesian statistics 5 (pp. 599–607). Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geman, S., & Geman, D. (1984). Stochastic relaxation, Gibbs distributions, and the Bayesian restoration of images.IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 6, 721–741.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hastings, W.K. (1970). Monte Carlo sampling methods using Markov chains and their application.Biometrika, 57, 97–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L., Bentler, P.M., & Kano, Y. (1992). Can test statistics in covariance structure analysis be tested?Psychological Bulletin, 112, 351–362.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jaccard, J., & Wan, C.K. (1995). Measurement error in the analysis of interaction effects between continuous predictors using multiple regression: Multiple indicator and structural equation approaches.Psychological Bulletin, 117, 348–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonsson, F.Y. (1998). Modeling interaction and nonlinear effects: A step by step LISREL example. In R.E. Schumacker & G.A. MarcoulidesInteraction and nonlinear effects in structural equation models (Eds.), (pp. 17–42). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jöreskog, K.G. & Sörbom, D. (1996).LISREL 8: Structural Equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language. Scientific Software International: Hove and London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kass, R.E., & Raftery, A.E. (1995). Bayes Factors.Journal of the American Statistical Association, 90, 773–795.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kenny, D.A., & Judd, C.M. (1984). Estimating the nonlinear and interactive effects of latent variables.Psychological Bulletin, 96, 201–210.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S.Y., & Song, X.Y. (2001). Hypothesis testing and model comparison in two-level structured equation models.Multivariate Behavioral Research, 36, 639–655.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S.Y., & Zhu, H.T. (2000). Statistical analysis of nonlinear structural equation models with continuous and polytomous data.British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 53, 209–232.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S.Y., & Zhu, H.T. (2002). Maximum likelihood estimation of nonlinear structural equation models.Psychometrika, 189–210.

  • Lempers, F.B. (1971).Posterior probabilities of alternative linear models. Rotterdam: University of Rotterdam Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Legler, J.M., & Ryan, L.M. (1997). Latent variable models for teratogenesis using multiple binary outcomes.Journal of the American Statistical Association, 92, 13–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, S.M., & Raftery, A.E. (1997). Estimating Bayes factors via posterior simulation with Laplace-Metropolis estimator.Journal of the American Statistical Association, 92, 648–663.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindley, D.V. & Smith, A.F.M. (1972). Bayes estimates for the linear model (with discussion).Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B,34, 1–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meng, X.L. (1994). Posterior predictivep-values.The Annals of Statistics, 22, 1142–1160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meng, X.L., & Schilling, S. (1996). Fitting full-information item factor models and an empirical investigation of bridge sampling.Journal of the American Statistical Association, 91, 1254–1267.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meng, X.L., & Wong, W.H. (1996). Simulating ratios of normalizing constants via a simple identity: A theoretical exploration.Statistica Sinica, 6, 831–860.

    Google Scholar 

  • Metropolis, N., Rosenbluth, A.W., Rosenbluth, M.N., Teller, A.H., & Teller, E. (1953). Equations of state calculations by fast computing machine.Journal of Chemical Physics, 21, 1087–1091.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ogata, Y. (1989). A Monte Carlo method for high dimensional integration.Numerische Mathematik, 55, 137–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ogata, Y. (1990). A Monte Carlo method for an objective Bayesian procedure.Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics, 42, 403–433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ping, R.A. (1996). Latent variable regression: A technique for estimating interaction and quadratic coefficients.Multivariate Behavioral Research, 31, 95–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raftery, A.E. (1993). Bayesian model selection in structural equation models. In K.A. Bollen & J.S. Long (Eds.),Testing structural equation models (pp. 163–180). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raftery, A.E. (1996). Hypothesis testing and model selection. In W.R. Wilks, S. Richardson & D.J. Spieglhalter (Eds.),Practical Markov Chain Monte Carlo (pp. 163–188). London: Chapman and Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, S., & Green, P.J. (1997). On Bayesian analysis of mixture with an unknown number of components (with discussion).Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B,59, 731–792.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, D.B. (1984). Bayesianly justifiable and relevant frequency calculation for the applied statistician.The Annals of Statistics, 12, 1151–1172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sammel, M.D., & Ryan, L.M. (1996). Latent variables with fixed effects.Biometrics, 52, 220–243.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sammel, M.D., Ryan, L.M., & Legler, J.M. (1997). Latent variable models for mixed discrete and continuous outcomes.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B,59, 667–678.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz, G. (1978). Estimating the dimension of a model.The Annals of Statistics, 6, 461–464.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumacker, R.E., & Marcoulides, G.A. (1998).Interaction and Nonlinear Effects in Structural Equation Models. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shi, J.Q., & Lee, S.Y. (2000). Latent variable models with mixed continuous and polytomous data.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B,62, 77–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Song, X.Y., & Lee, S.Y. (2001). Bayesian estimation and test for factor analysis model with continuous and polytomous data in several populations.British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 54, 237–263.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Song, X.Y., & Lee, S.Y. (2002). Bayesian estimation and model selection of multivariate linear model with polytomous variables.Multivariate Behavior Research, 37, 453–477.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spiegelhalter, D.J. & Smith, A.F.M. (1982). Bayes factor for linear and log-linear models with vague prior information.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B,44, 377–387.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tanner, M., & Wong, W.H. (1987). The calculation of posterior distribution by data augmentation (with discussion).Journal of the American Statistical Association, 82 528–550.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tierney, L. & Kadane, J.B. (1986). A accurate approximations for posterior moments and marginal densities.Journal of the American Statistical Association, 81, 82–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Values Survey: 1981–1984 & 1990–1993. (1994). ICPSR version. Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research [producer], 1994. Ann Arbon, MI: Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]. (For the I.C.P.S.R. version the Institute for Social Research is the producer, and the Inter-University Consortium of Political and Social Research is the distributor.)

  • Yuan, K.E., & Bentler, P.M. (1997). Mean and covariance structures analysis: The oretical and practical improvements.Journal of the American Statistical Association, 92, 767–774.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhu, H.T., & Lee, S.Y. (1999). Statistical analysis of nonlinear factor analysis models.British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 52, 225–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Statistics, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, N.T., Hong Kong

    Sik-Yum Lee

  2. Department of Statistics, The Chinese University of Hong Kong Zhongshan University, China

    Xin-Yuan Song

Authors
  1. Sik-Yum Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Xin-Yuan Song
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sik-Yum Lee.

Additional information

This research is fully supported by a grant from the Research Grant Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China (Project No. CUHK 4346/01H). The authors are thankful to the Editor, the Associate Editor, and anonymous reviewers for valuable comments which improve the paper significantly, and grateful to ICPSR and the relevant funding agency for allowing use of the data in the example. The assistance of Michael K.H. Leung and Esther L.S. Tam is gratefully acknowledged.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lee, SY., Song, XY. Model comparison of nonlinear structural equation models with fixed covariates. Psychometrika 68, 27–47 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02296651

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02296651

Key words

Search

Navigation