Zusammenfassung
Dieses Kapitel vermittelt folgende Lernziele: Vorteile von Strukturgleichungsmodellen für Datenanalysen kennen. Den Aufbau der Modelle und die dahinterstehenden Gleichungen verstehen. Verstehen, wie empirische Daten mit Strukturgleichungsmodellen analysiert werden. Einfache Analysen selbst durchführen und interpretieren können. Voraussetzungen und Probleme des Einsatzes von Strukturgleichungsmodellen kennen. Ergebnisse aus Analysen kritisch beurteilen können.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Literatur
Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Verbeke, W. (2004). Using the job demands-resources model to predict burnout and performance. Human Resource Management, 43, 83–104.
Baron, R. M. & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.
Beauducel, A. & Herzberg, P. Y. (2006). On the performance of maximum likelihood vs. means and variance adjusted weighted least squares estimation in CFA. Structural Equation Modeling, 13, 186–203.
Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246.
Bentler, P. M. (1995). EQS structural equations program manual. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software.
Bentler, P. M. & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588–606.
Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York, NY: Wiley.
Breckler, S. J. (1990). Application of covariance structure modeling in psychology: Cause for concern? Psychological Bulletin, 107, 260–273.
Briggs, N. E., & MacCallum, R. C. (2003). Recovery of weak common factors by maximum likelihood and ordinary least squares estimation. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 38, 25–56.
Browne, M. W. & Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods and Research, 21, 230–258.
Curran, P. J., Bollen, K. A., Chen, F., Paxton, P., & Kirby, J. (2003). The finite sampling properties of the RMSEA: Point estimates and confidence intervals. Sociological Methods and Research, 32, 208–252.
Curran, P. J., West, S. G., & Finch, J. F. (1996). The robustness of test statistics to nonnormality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 1, 16–29.
Duncan, O. D. (1966). Path analysis. Sociological examples. American Journal of Sociology, 72, 1–16.
Fan, X. & Sivo, S. A. (2007). Sensitivity of fit indices to model misspecification and model types. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 42, 509–529.
Fan, X., Thompson, B., & Wang, L. (1999). Effects of sample size, estimation method, and model specification on structural equation modeling fit indexes. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 56–83.
Gelfand, L. A., Mensinger, J. L., & Tenhave, T. (2009). Mediation analysis: A retrospective snapshot of practice and more recent directions. The Journal of General Psychology, 136, 153–178.
Goldberger, A. S. & Duncan, O. D. (1973). Structural equation models in the social sciences. New York, NY: Seminar Press.
Hammervold, R. & Olsson, U. H. (2012). Testing structural equation models: The impact of error variances in the data generating process. Quality and Quantity, 46, 1547–1570.
Heene, M., Hilbert, S., Draxler, C., Ziegler, M., & Bühner, M. (2011). Masking misfit in confirmatory factor analysis by increasing unique variances: A cautionary note on the usefulness of cutoff values of fit indices. Psychological Methods, 16, 319–336.
Hershberger, S. L. (2003). The growth of structural equation modeling: 1994–2001. Structural Equation Modeling, 10, 35–46.
Hewitt, P. L. & Flett, G. L. (1991). Perfectionism in the self and social contexts: Conceptualisation, assessment, and association with psychopathology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 456–470.
Heywood, H. B. (1931). On finite sequences of real numbers. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series A, 134, 486–501.
Hu, L.-T. & Bentler, P. M. (1995). Evaluating model fit. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling. Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 76–99). London, UK: Sage.
Hu, L.-T., & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3, 424–453.
Hu, L.-T. & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria vs. new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.
Jackson, D. L., Gillaspy, J. A., Jr., & Purc-Stephenson, R. (2009). Reporting practices in confirmatory factor analysis: An overview and some recommendations. Psychological Methods, 14, 6–23.
Jöreskog, K. G. (1970). A general method for analysis of covariance structures. Biometrika, 57, 239–251.
Jöreskog, K. G. (1973). A general method for estimating a linear structural equation system. In A. S. Goldberger & O. D. Duncan (Eds.), Structural equation models in the social sciences, (pp. 85–112). New York, NY: Seminar Press.
Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1981). LISREL V: Analysis of linear structural relationships by maximum likelihood and least squares methods. Uppsala, Sweden: University of Uppsala, Department of Statistics.
Jöreskog, K. G. & Sörbom, D. (1989). LISREL 7: User’s reference guide. Chicago, IL: SPSS.
Jöreskog, K. G. & Sörbom, D. (1996). LISREL 8: User’s reference guide. Chicago, IL: Scientific Software International.
Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York, NY: Guilford.
MacCallum, R. C., & Austin, J. T. (2000). Applications of structural equation modeling in psychological research. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 201–226.
MacCallum, R. C. & Tucker, L. R. (1991). Representing sources of error in the common factor model: Implications for theory and practice. Psychological Bulletin, 109, 502–511.
MacCallum, R. C., Tucker, L. R., & Briggs, N. E. (2001). An alternative perspective on parameter estimation in factor analysis and related methods. In R. Cudeck, S. H. C. du Toit & D. Sörbom (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: Present and future (pp. 39–57). Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International.
MacCallum, R. C., Wegener, D. T., Uchino, B. N., & Fabrigar, L. R. (1993). The problem of equivalent models in applications of covariance structure analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 185–199.
Marsh, H. W. & Grayson, D. (1995). Latent variable models of multitrait-multimethod data. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues and applications (pp. 177–198). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Maruyama, G. M. (1998). Basics of structural equation modeling. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Maslach, C., Jackson, S. E., & Leiter, M. P. (1997). Maslach burnout inventory. In C. P. Zalaquett & R. J. Wood (Eds.), Evaluating stress: A book of resources (pp. 191–218). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow.
McDonald, R. P. & Ho, M.-H. R. (2002). Principles and practice in reporting structural equation analyses. Psychological Methods, 7, 64–82.
Micceri, T. (1989). The unicorn, the normal curve, and other improbable creatures. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 156–166.
Moosbrugger, H. (2011). Klassische Testtheorie. In H. Moosbrugger & A. Kelava (Hrsg.), Testtheorie und Fragebogenkonstruktion (2. Aufl., S. 103–117). Berlin: Springer.
Muthén, L. K. & Muthén, B. O. (2012). Mplus User’s Guide. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
Nye, C. D. & Drasgow, F. (2011). Assessing goodness of fit: Simple rules of thumb simply do not work. Organizational Research Methods, 14, 548–570.
Olsson, U. H., Foss, T., Troye, S. V. & Howell, R. D. (2000). The performance of ML, GLS, and WLS estimation in structural equation modeling under conditions of misspecification and nonnormality. Structural Equation Modeling, 7, 557–595.
Peter, R. (2002). Berufliche Gratifikationskrisen und Gesundheit. Psychotherapeut, 47, 386–398.
Philp, M., Egan, S., & Kane, R. (2012). Perfectionism, over commitment to work, and burnout in employees seeking workplace counseling. Australian Journal of Psychology, 64, 68–74.
R Development Core Team (2015). R: A language and environment for statistical computing (version 3.2.1) [Computer software and manual]. Wien: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved August 19, 2015, from http://r-project.org.
Reinecke, J. (2014). Strukturgleichungsmodelle in den Sozialwissenschaften. München: Oldenbourg.
Rhemtulla, M., Brosseau-Liard, P., & Savalei, V. (2012). How many categories is enough to treat data as continuous? A comparison of robust continuous and categorical SEM estimation methods under a range of non-ideal situations. Psychological Methods, 17, 354-373.
Rosseel, Y. (2012). lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1–36. Retrieved November 13, 2013, from http://www.jstatsoft.org/v48/i02.
Rosseel, Y. (2015). R package lavaan: Latent variable analysis (version 0.5-18) [Computer software and manual]. Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium. Retrieved August 19, 2015, from http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/lavaan/.
Satorra, A. & Bentler, P. M. (1994). Corrections to test statistics and standard errors in covariance structure analysis. In A. von Eye & C. C. Clogg (Eds.), Latent variables analysis: Applications for developmental research (pp. 399–419). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Schafer, J. L. & Graham, J. W. (2002). Missing data: Our view of the state of the art. Psychological Methods, 7, 147–177.
Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8, 23–74. Retrieved November 13, 2013, from http://www.dgps.de/fachgruppen/methoden/mpr-online/.
Siegrist, J., Starke, D., Chandola, T., Godin, I., Marmot, M., Niedhammer, I., & Peter, R. (2004). The measurement of effort-reward imbalance at work: European comparisons. Social Science and Medicine, 58, 1483–1499.
Steiger, J. H. & Lind, J. C. (1980). Statistically-based tests for the number of factors. Paper presented at the Annual Spring Meeting of the Psychometric Society, Iowa City, IA. Retrieved November 13, 2013, from http://www.statpower.net/SteigerBiblio/Steiger-Lind1980.pdf.
Stelzl, I. (1986). Changing a causal hypothesis whithout changing the fit: Some rules for generating equivalent path models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 21, 309–331.
Sugawara, H. M. & MacCallum, R. C. (1993). Effect of estimation method on incremental fit indexes for covariance structure models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 17, 365–377.
Tanaka, J. S. & Huba, G. J. (1984). Confirmatory hierarchical factor analyses of psychological distress measures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 621–635.
West, S. G., Finch, J. F., & Curran, P. J. (1995). Structural equation modeling with nonnormal variables: Problems and remedies. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues and applications (pp. 37–55). Thousand Oakes, CA: Sage.
Wright, S. (1918). On the nature of size factors. Genetics, 3, 367–374.
Wright, S. (1934). The method of path coefficients. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 5, 161–215.
Ximénez, C. (2006). A Monte Carlo study of recovery of weak factor loadings in confirmatory factor analysis. Structural Equation Modeling, 13, 587–614.
Ximénez, C. (2007). Effect of variable and subject sampling on recovery of weak factors in CFA. Methodology, 3, 67–80.
Zhao, X., Lynch, J. G., Jr., & Chen, Q. (2010). Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 37, 197–206.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Werner, C., Schermelleh-Engel, K., Gerhard, C., Gäde, J.C. (2016). Strukturgleichungsmodelle. In: Forschungsmethoden und Evaluation in den Sozial- und Humanwissenschaften. Springer-Lehrbuch. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41089-5_17
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41089-5_17
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-41088-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-41089-5
eBook Packages: Psychology (German Language)