Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Mean Comparison: Manifest Variable Versus Latent Variable

  • Published:
Psychometrika Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Mean comparisons are of great importance in the application of statistics. Procedures for mean comparison with manifest variables have been well studied. However, few rigorous studies have been conducted on mean comparisons with latent variables, although the methodology has been widely used and documented. This paper studies the commonly used statistics in latent variable mean modeling and compares them with parallel manifest variable statistics. Our results indicate that, under certain conditions, the likelihood ratio and Wald statistics used for latent mean comparisons do not always have greater power than the Hotelling T 2 statistics used for manifest mean comparisons. The noncentrality parameter corresponding to the T 2 statistic can be much greater than those corresponding to the likelihood ratio and Wald statistics, which we find to be different from those provided in the literature. Under a fixed alternative hypothesis, our results also indicate that the likelihood ratio statistic can be stochastically much greater than the corresponding Wald statistic. The robustness property of each statistic is also explored when the model is misspecified or when data are nonnormally distributed. Recommendations and advice are provided for the use of each statistic.

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

  • Algina, J., & Oshima, T.C. (1990). Robustness of the independent samples Hotelling’s T2 to variance—covariance heteroscedasticity when sample sizes are unequal and in small ratios. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 308–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amemiya, Y., & Anderson, T.W. (1990). Asymptotic chi-square tests for a large class of factor analysis models. Annals of Statistics, 18, 1453–1463.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnold, S.F. (1981). The theory of linear models and multivariate analysis. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bagozzi, R.P. (1977). Structural equation models in experimental research. Journal of Marketing Research, 14, 209–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bagozzi, R.P., & Yi, Y. (1989). On the use of structural equation models in experimental designs. Journal of Marketing Research, 26, 271–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bentler, P.M. (1968). Alpha-maximized factor analysis (Alphamax): Its relation to alpha and canonical factor analysis. Psychometrika, 33, 335–345.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bentler, P.M. (1995). EQS structural equations program manual. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bentler, P.M., & Yuan, K.-H. (2000). On adding a mean structure to a covariance structure model. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60, 326–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Browne, M.W., & Arminger, G. (1995). Specification and estimation of mean and covariance structure models. In G. Arminger, C.C. Clogg, & M.E. Sobel (Eds.), Handbook of statistical modeling for the social and behavioral sciences (pp. 185–249). New York: Plenum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Browne, M.W., & Shapiro, A. (1988). Robustness of normal theory methods in the analysis of linear latent variate models. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 41, 193–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buse, A. (1982). The likelihood ratio, Wald, and Lagrange multiplier tests: An expository note. American Statistician, 36, 153–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, B.M., Shavelson, R.J., & Muthén, B. (1989). Testing for the equivalence of factorial covariance and mean structures: The issue of partial measurement invariance. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 456–466.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chou, C.-P., & Bentler, P.M. (1990). Model modification in covariance structure modeling: A comparison among likelihood ratio, Lagrange multiplier, and Wald tests. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 115–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cole, D.A., Maxwell, S.E., Arvey, R., & Salas, E. (1993). Multivariate group comparisons of variable systems: MANOVA and structural equation modeling. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 174–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Curran, P.J. (2000). A latent curve framework for the study of developmental trajectories in adolescent substance use. In J.R. Rose, L. Chassin, C.C. Presson, & S.J. Sherman (Eds.), Multivariate applications in substance use research: New methods for new questions (pp. 1–42). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duncan, T.E., Duncan, S.C., Strycker, L.A., Li, F., & Alpert, A. (1999). An introduction to latent variable growth curve modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Efron, B., & Tibshirani, R.J. (1993). An introduction to the bootstrap. New York: Chapman & Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engle, R. (1984). Wald, likelihood ratio and Lagrange multiplier tests in econometrics. In Z. Griliches, & M.D. Intrilligator (Eds.), Handbook of econometrics (Vol. II, pp. 775–826). Amsterdam: North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson, T. (1996). A course in large sample theory. London: Chapman & Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hakstian, A.R., Roed, J.C., & Lind, J.C. (1979). Two-sample T2 procedure and the assumption of homogeneous covariance matrices. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 1255–1263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hancock, G.R. (2001). Effect size, power, and sample size determination for structured means modeling and MIMIC approaches to between-groups hypothesis testing of means on a single latent construct. Psychometrika, 66, 373–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hancock, G.R. (2003). Fortune cookies, measurement error, and experimental design. Journal of Modern Applied Statistical Methods, 2, 293–305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hancock, G.R., Lawrence, F.R., & Nevitt, J. (2000). Type I error and power of latent mean methods and MANOVA in factorially invariant and noninvariant latent variable systems. Structural Equation Modeling, 7, 534–556.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hancock, G.R., & Mueller, R.O. (2001). Rethinking construct reliability. In R. Cudeck, S. du Toit, & D. Sörbom (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: Present and future (pp. 195–216). Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ito, K., & Schull, W.J. (1964). On the robustness of the T 02 test in multivariate analysis of variance when variance–covariance matrices are not equal. Biometrika, 51, 71–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kano, Y. (1986). Conditions on consistency of estimators in the covariance structure model. Journal of the Japan Statistical Society, 16, 75–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kano, Y. (1995). An asymptotic expansion of the distribution of Hotelling’s T2-statistic under general distributions. American Journal of Mathematical and Management Sciences, 15, 317–341.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kano, Y. (2001). Structural equation modeling for experimental data. In R. Cudeck, S.H.C. du Toit, & D. Sörbom (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: Present and future (pp. 381–402). Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kano, Y., Bentler, P.M., & Mooijaart, A. (1993). Additional information and precision of estimators in multivariate structural models. In K. Matusita, M.L. Puri, & T. Hayakawa (Eds.), Statistical sciences and data analysis (pp. 187–196). Zeist, Netherlands: VSP International Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, D., & George, R. (1995). A study of the power associated with testing factor mean differences under violations of factorial invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 2, 101–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kühnel, S.M. (1988). Testing MANOVA designs with LISREL. Sociological Methods and Research, 16, 504–523.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li, H. (1997). A unifying expression for the maximal reliability of a linear composite. Psychometrika, 62, 245–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacCallum, R.C., Browne, M.W., & Sugawara, H.M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1, 130–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Magnus, J.R., & Neudecker, H. (1999). Matrix differential calculus with applications in statistics and econometrics. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • McArdle, J.J., & Epstein, D. (1987). Latent growth curves with developmental structure equation models. Child Development, 58, 110–133.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Meredith, W., & Tisak, J. (1990). Latent curve analysis. Psychometrika, 55, 107–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muthén, B. (1989). Latent variable modeling in heterogeneous populations. Psychometrika, 54, 557–585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raykov, T. (2004). Estimation of maximal reliability: A note on a covariance structure modeling approach. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 57, 21–27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rudin, W. (1976). Principles of mathematical analysis (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Satorra, A. (1989). Alternative test criteria in covariance structure analysis: A unified approach. Psychometrika, 54, 131–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Satorra, A., & Bentler, P.M. (1990). Model conditions for asymptotic robustness in the analysis of linear relations. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 10, 235–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Satorra, A., & Saris, W. (1985). Power of the likelihood ratio test in covariance structure analysis. Psychometrika, 50, 83–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, A. (1983). Asymptotic distribution theory in the analysis of covariance structures (a unified approach). South African Statistical Journal, 17, 33–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, A. (1984). A note on the consistency of estimators in the analysis of moment structures. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 37, 84–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sörbom, D. (1974). A general method for studying differences in factor means and factor structures between groups. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 27, 229–239.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steiger, J.H., Shapiro, A., & Browne, M.W. (1985). On the multivariate asymptotic distribution of sequential chi-square statistics. Psychometrika, 50, 253–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stroud, T.W.F. (1972). Fixed alternatives and Wald’s formulation of the noncentral asymptotic behavior of the likelihood ratio statistic. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 43, 447–454.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wakaki, H., Yanagihara, H., & Fujikoshi, Y. (2002). Asymptotic expansions of the null distributions of test statistics for multivariate linear hypothesis under nonnormality. Hiroshima Mathematical Journal, 32, 17–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wald, A. (1943). Tests of statistical hypotheses concerning several parameters when the number of observations is large. Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 54, 426–482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yanagihara, H., & Yuan, K.-H. (2005). Three approximate solutions to the multivariate Behrens—Fisher problem. Communication in Statistics—Simulation and Computation, 34, 975–988.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yuan, K.-H., & Bentler, P.M. (1998). Normal theory based test statistics in structural equation modeling. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 51, 289–309.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Yuan, K.-H., & Bentler, P.M. (1999). On normal theory and associated test statistics in covariance structure analysis under two classes of nonnormal distributions. Statistica Sinica, 9, 831–853.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yuan, K.-H., & Bentler, P.M. (2002). On robustness of the normal-theory based asymptotic distributions of three reliability coefficient estimates. Psychometrika, 67, 251–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yuan, K.-H., & Bentler, P.M. (2004). On chi-square difference and z tests in mean and covariance structure analysis when the base model is misspecified. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64, 737–757.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yuan, K.-H., Bentler, P.M., & Kano, Y. (1997). On averaging variables in a confirmatory factor analysis model. Behaviormetrika, 24, 71–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yuan, K.-H., & Chan, W. (2005). On nonequivalence of several procedures of structural equation modeling. Psychometrika, 70, 791–798.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yuan, K.-H., Marshall, L.L., & Bentler, P.M. (2002). A unified approach to exploratory factor analysis with missing data, nonnormal data, and in the presence of outliers. Psychometrika, 67, 95–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yuan, K.-H., Marshall, L.L., & Bentler, P.M. (2003). Assessing the effect of model misspecifications on parameter estimates in structural equation models. Sociological Methodology, 33, 241–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yung, Y.-F., & Bentler, P.M. (1999). On added information for ML factor analysis with mean and covariance structures. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 24, 1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Notre Dame, USA

    Ke-Hai Yuan

  2. University of California, Los Angeles

    Peter M. Bentler

  3. Department of Psychology, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN, 46556, USA

    Ke-Hai Yuan

Authors
  1. Ke-Hai Yuan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Peter M. Bentler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ke-Hai Yuan.

Additional information

The research was supported by NSF grant DMS-0437167 and Grant DA01070 from the National Institute on Drug Abuse.

We would like to thank three referees for suggestions that helped in improving the paper.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Yuan, KH., Bentler, P.M. Mean Comparison: Manifest Variable Versus Latent Variable. Psychometrika 71, 139–159 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-004-1181-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-004-1181-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation