Skip to main content
Log in

Construct validity and second-order factorial model

The second-order factor model

  • Published:
Quality and Quantity Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Three second-order factorial models are defined, using the LISREL notation, to assess the univocity of a construct. The first model assumes that the constructs are heterogeneous, the second that they are homogeneous. The third model introduces the notion of partial homogeneity between constructs. Partial homogeneity is defined in terms of a LISREL second-order factor model. In some cases, this model offers a viable alternative to the collapsing of items into a unique scale. An example is given of scales which fit the partial homogeneity model.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allen, M.J. & Yen, W.M. (1979) Introduction to Measurement Theory. Monterey: Brooks and Cole.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alwin, D.F. & Jackson, D.J. (1979). “Measurement models for response errors in surveys: issues and applications”, pp. 68–119 in K.F.Schuessler (ed.), Sociological Methodology 1980. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Psychological Associate (1974). Standards for Educational and Psychological Tests. Washington: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Armor, D.J. (1974). “Theta reliability and factor scaling”, pp. 17–50 in H.L.Costner (ed.) Sociological Methodology 1973–1974. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bentler, P.M. (1985) Theory and Implementation of EQS: A Structural Equation Program. Los Angeles: BMDP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bynner, J. (1981). “Use of LISREL in the solution to a higher-order factor problem in a study of adolescent self-images”, Quality & Quantity 15: 523–540.

    Google Scholar 

  • Costner, H.L. (1969). “Theory deduction and rules of correspondance”, American Journal of Sociology 75: 245–263.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harman, H.H. (1976), Modern Factor Analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heise, D.R. & Bohrnstedt, G.W. (1970). “Validity, invalidity and reliability”, pp. 104–129 in F.F.Borgatta and G.W.Bohrnstedt (eds), Sociological Methodology 1970. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joreskog, K.G. (1970). “A general method for the analysis of covariance structures”, Biometrika 57: 239–251.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joreskog, K.G. (1973). “Analysis of covariance structures”, pp. 263–285 in P.R.Krisnaiah (ed.), Multivariate Analysis III. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joreskog, K.G. (1974). “Analyzing psychological data by structural analysis of covariance matrices”, pp. 1–56 in R.C.Atkinson, R.D.Luce & P.Suppes (eds), Contemporary Developments in Mathematical Psychology II. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joreskog, K.G. (1981). “Analysis of covariance structures”, Scand. J. Stat. 8: 65–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joreskog, K.G. & Sorbom, D. (1984), LISREL VI. Mooresville: Scientific Software.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kenny, D. (1979), Correlation and Causality. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeller, R.A. & Carmines, E.G. (1980). Measurement in the Social Sciences: The Link Between Theory and Data. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Béland, F., Maheux, B. Construct validity and second-order factorial model. Qual Quant 23, 143–159 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00151900

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00151900

Keywords

Navigation