Comparison of Bootstrap Confidence Interval Methods for GSCA Using a Monte Carlo Simulation

被引:69
|
作者
Jung, Kwanghee [1 ]
Lee, Jaehoon [1 ]
Gupta, Vibhuti [2 ]
Cho, Gyeongcheol [3 ]
机构
[1] Texas Tech Univ, Dept Educ Psychol & Leadership, Lubbock, TX 79409 USA
[2] Texas Tech Univ, Dept Comp Sci, Lubbock, TX 79409 USA
[3] McGill Univ, Dept Psychol, Montreal, PQ, Canada
来源
FRONTIERS IN PSYCHOLOGY | 2019年 / 10卷
关键词
structural equation modeling (SEM); bootstrap methods; generalized structured component analysis (GSCA); confidence intervals; Monte Carlo simulation; STRUCTURED COMPONENT ANALYSIS;
D O I
10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02215
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
Generalized structured component analysis (GSCA) is a theoretically well-founded approach to component-based structural equation modeling (SEM). This approach utilizes the bootstrap method to estimate the confidence intervals of its parameter estimates without recourse to distributional assumptions, such as multivariate normality. It currently provides the bootstrap percentile confidence intervals only. Recently, the potential usefulness of the bias-corrected and accelerated bootstrap (BCa) confidence intervals (CIs) over the percentile method has attracted attention for another component-based SEM approach-partial least squares path modeling. Thus, in this study, we implemented the BCa CI method into GSCA and conducted a rigorous simulation to evaluate the performance of three bootstrap CI methods, including percentile, BCa, and Student's t methods, in terms of coverage and balance. We found that the percentile method produced CIs closer to the desired level of coverage than the other methods, while the BCa method was less prone to imbalance than the other two methods. Study findings and implications are discussed, as well as limitations and directions for future research.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Comparison of transmission probabilities calculated by Monte Carlo simulation and analytical methods
    Szwemin, P
    Niewinski, M
    VACUUM, 2002, 67 (3-4) : 359 - 362
  • [42] A comparison of Logit and Probit models using Monte Carlo simulation
    Ma, Jun
    Li, Congying
    2021 PROCEEDINGS OF THE 40TH CHINESE CONTROL CONFERENCE (CCC), 2021, : 8963 - 8967
  • [43] COMPARISON OF PREDICTOR SELECTION TECHNIQUES USING MONTE CARLO METHODS
    ROCK, DA
    LINN, RL
    EVANS, FR
    PATRICK, C
    EDUCATIONAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL MEASUREMENT, 1970, 30 (04) : 873 - &
  • [44] Reliability Assessment with Fuzzy Random Variables Using Interval Monte Carlo Simulation
    Jahani, Ehsan
    Muhanna, Rafi L.
    Shayanfar, Mohsen A.
    Barkhordari, Mohammad A.
    COMPUTER-AIDED CIVIL AND INFRASTRUCTURE ENGINEERING, 2014, 29 (03) : 208 - 220
  • [45] The effect of Monte Carlo approximation on coverage error of double-bootstrap confidence intervals
    Lee, SMS
    Young, GA
    JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL STATISTICAL SOCIETY SERIES B-STATISTICAL METHODOLOGY, 1999, 61 : 353 - 366
  • [46] Uncertainty Analysis of a GHG Emission Model Output Using the Block Bootstrap and Monte Carlo Simulation
    Lee, Min Hyeok
    Lee, Jong Seok
    Lee, Joo Young
    Kim, Yoon Ha
    Park, Yoo Sung
    Lee, Kun Mo
    SUSTAINABILITY, 2017, 9 (09)
  • [47] Soil contamination sampling intensity: determining accuracy and confidence using a Monte Carlo simulation
    Sorenson, P. T.
    McCormick, S.
    Dyck, M.
    CANADIAN JOURNAL OF SOIL SCIENCE, 2019, 99 (03) : 254 - 261
  • [48] Moment approach to the bootstrap current in nonaxisymmetric toroidal plasmas using δf Monte Carlo methods
    Matsuyama, A.
    Isaev, M. Yu.
    Watanabe, K. Y.
    Hanatani, K.
    Suzuki, Y.
    Nakajima, N.
    Cooper, W. A.
    Tran, T. M.
    PHYSICS OF PLASMAS, 2009, 16 (05)
  • [49] How many subjects? A Monte Carlo bootstrap simulation for functional imaging
    Chen, LW
    Zhao, Z
    Medoff, D
    Holcomb, HH
    Lahti, AC
    Tamminga, CA
    SCHIZOPHRENIA RESEARCH, 1997, 24 (1-2) : 164 - 164
  • [50] Confidence bands for Brownian motion and applications to Monte Carlo simulation
    W. S. Kendall
    J.-M. Marin
    C. P. Robert
    Statistics and Computing, 2007, 17 : 1 - 10