Construct Explication through Factor or Component Analysis: A Review and Evaluation of Alternative Procedures for Determining the Number of Factors or Components

  • Wayne F. Velicer
  • Cheryl A. Eaton
  • Joseph L. Fava

Abstract

The concept of a construct is central to many of the advances in the behavioral sciences during the second half of this century. Constructs serve to summarize, organize, and facilitate the interpretation of data. The concept of a construct also permits us to move directly from data analysis to theory development and testing. Factor analysis and component analysis are two very similar methods that facilitate the transition from dealing with a large number of observed variables to a smaller number of constructed or latent variables. Douglas Jackson employed factor or component analysis as an integral part of his sequential approach to the development of psychological measures (Jackson, 1970, 1971). It has become a standard part of measure development and is one of the most employed statistical procedures in the behavioral sciences.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allen, S. J & Hubbard, R. (1986). Regression equations for the latent roots of random data correlation matrices with unities on the diagonal. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 21, 393–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson, R. D., Acito, F. & Lee, H. (1982). A simulation study of three methods for determining the number of image components. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 17, 493–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bartlett, M. S. (1950). Tests of significance in factor analysis. British Journal of Psychology, Statistical Section, 3, 77–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bartlett, M. S. (1951). A further note on tests of significance in factor analysis. British Journal of Psychology, Statistical Section, 4, 1–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bentler, P. M. (1980). Multivariate analysis with latent variables: Causal modeling. In M. R. Rosenzweig & L. W. Porter (eds.), Annual Review of Psychology, (pp. 419–454). Stanford, CA Annual Reviews, Inc.Google Scholar
  6. Bentler, P.M. & Kano, Y, (1990). On the equivalence of factors and components. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 51, 67–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bookstein, F. L. (1990). Least squares and latent variables. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 75–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boomsma, A. (1983). On the robustness of LJSREL (maximum likelihood) estimates against small sample sizes and non-normality. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, kijksuniversiteit Gronigen, the Netherlands.Google Scholar
  9. Cattell, R. B. (1966). The scree test for the number of fastors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1, 245–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cattell, R. B. & Jaspers, J. (1967). A general plasmode for factor analytic exercises and research. Multivariate Behavioral Research Monographs, 3, 1–212.Google Scholar
  11. Cattell, R. B. & Vogelmann, S. A (1977). A comprehensive trial of the scree and Kaiser-Guttman criteria for determining the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 12, 289–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cliff, N. (1970). The relation between sample and population characteristic vectors. Psychometrika, 35, 163–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cliff, N. (1988). The eigenvalue greater than one rule and the reliability of components. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 276–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cliff, N. & Hamburger, C. (1967). Study of sampling errors in factor analysis by means of artificial experiments. Psychological Bulletin, 68, 430–445.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Crawford, C. B. & Koopman, P. (1973). A note on Horn’s test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 8, 117–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Eaton, C. A., Velicer, W. F., & Fava, J. L. (1999). Determining the Number of Components: An Evaluation of Parallel Analysis and the Minimum Average Partial Correlation Procedures. Manuscript under review.Google Scholar
  17. Fava, J. L., & Velicer, W.F. (1992a). An empirical comparison of factor, image, component, and scale scores. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 27, 301–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fava, J. L., & Velicer, W.F. (1992b). The effects of overextraction on factor and component analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 27, 387–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fava, J. L., & Velicer, W.F. (1996). The effects of underextraction in factor and component analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56, 907–929.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gorsuch, R. L. (1973). Using Bartlett’s significance test to determine the number of factors to extract. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 33, 361–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gorsuch, R. L. (1983). Factor Analysis. (2nd ed.) Hillsdale, N. J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  22. Gorsuch, R.L. (1991). UniMult Guide. Altadena, CA: UniMultGoogle Scholar
  23. Guttman, L. (1990). Common factor analysis versus component analysis Some well and little known facts. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 33–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Guttman, L. (1954). Some necessary conditions for common factor analysis. Psychometrika, 19, 149–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Guadagnoli, E. & Velicer, W. F. (1988). Relation of sample size to the stability of component patterns. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 265–275.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Guadagnoli, E. & Velicer, W. (1991). A comparison of pattern matching indices. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 26, 323–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hakstian, A R., Rogers, W. T., & Cattell, R. B. (1982). The behavior of number-of-factors rules with simulated data. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 17, 193–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hays, R-D. (1987). PARALLEL: A program for performing parallel analysis. Applied Psychological Measurement, 11, 58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Holden, R. R., Longman, R. S., Cota, A. A., & Fekken, G. C. (1989). PAR: Parallel analysis routine for random data eigenvalue estimation. Applied PsychologicalMeasurement, 13, 192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Horn, J.L. (1965). A Rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 30, 179–185.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Horn, J.L & Engstrom, R. (1979). Cattell’s scree test in relation to Bartlett’s chi-square test and other observations on the number of factors problem. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 14, 283–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Howe, H. G. (1955). Some contributions to factor analysis. Oak Ridge, TH: Oak Ridge National Laboratory.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hubbard, R. & Allen, S. J. (1987). An empirical comparison of alternate methods for principal components extractioa. Journal of Business Research, 15, 173–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Jackson, D.N. (1970). A sequential system for personality scale development. In CD. Spielberger (Ed.), Current Topics in Clinical and Community Psychology, (Vol. 2, pp. 61–96). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  35. Jackson, D. N. (1971). The dynamics of structured personality tests. Psychological Review, 78, 229–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Jackson, D. N., & Chan, D. W. (1980). Maximum-likelihood estimation in common factor analysisA cautionary note. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 502–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kaiser, H. F. (1960). The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 141–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lautenschlager, G. J. (1989a). A comparison of alternatives to conducting Monte Carlo analyses for determining parallel analysis criteria. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 24, 365–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lautenschlager, G. J. (1989b). PARANALTOK: A program for developing parallel analysis criteria. Applied Psychological Measurement, 13, 176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lautenschlager, G. J., Lance, C. E., & Flaherty, V. L. (1989). Parallel analysis criteria: Revised equations for estimating the latent roots of random data correlation matrices. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 49, 339–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lee, H. B. & Comrey, A. L. (1979). Distortions in a commonly used factor analytic procedure. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 14, 301–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Linn, R. L. (1968). A Monte Carlo approach to the number of factors problem. Psychometrika, 33, 37–71.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Loehlin, J.C. (1990). Component analysis versus common factor analysis: A case of disputed authorship. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 29–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Longman, R. S., Cota, A. A., Holden, R. R., & Fekken, G. C. (1989a). A regressionequation for the parallel analysis criterion in principal components analysis: Mean and 95th percentile eigenvalues. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 24, 59–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Longman, R. S., Cota, A. A., Holden, R. R., & Fekken, G. C. (1989b). PAM: A double precision FORTRAN routine for the parallel analysis method in principal components analysis. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 21, 477–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Longman, R. S., Cota, A. A., Holden, R. R., & Fekken, G. C. (1991). Implementing parallel analysis for principal components analysis: A comparison of six methods. Unpublished manuscriptGoogle Scholar
  47. Longman, R. S., Holden, R. R., & Fekken, G. C. (1991). Anomalies in the Allen and Hubbard parallel analysis procedure. Applied Psychological Measurement, 15, 95–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. MacCallum, R. C., Widaman, K. F., Zhang, S., & Hong, S. (1999). Sample size in factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 4, 84–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Marsh, H.W., Balla, J. R., & McDonald, R. P. (1988). Goodness of fit indices in confirmatory factor analysis: The effect of sample size. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 391–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. McArdle, J.J. (1990). Principles versus principals of structural factor analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 81–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Montanelli, Jr., R. G. (1975). A computer program to generate sample correlation and covariance matrices. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 35, 195–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Montanelli, Jr., R. G. & Humphreys, L. G. (1976). Latent roots of random data correlation matrices with squared multiple correlations on the diagonal: A Monte Carlo study. Psychometrika, 41, 341–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Morrison, D. F. (1976). Multivariate Statistical Methods. (2nd ed). New York: McGraw-HillGoogle Scholar
  54. Mulaik, S.A (1990). Blurring the distinctions between component analysisand common factor analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 53–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Odell, P. L. & Feiveson, A. H. (1966). A numerical procedure to generate a sample covariance matrix. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 61, 199–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Reddon, J. R (1985). MAPF and MAPS: Subroutines for the number of principal components. Applied Psychological Measurement, 9, 97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Revelle, W. & Rocklin, T. (1979). Very simple structure: An alternative procedure for estimating the optimal number of interpretable factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 14, 403–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Rozeboom, W.W. (1990). Whatever happened to broad perspective? Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 61–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Schonemann, P. H. (1990). Facts, fictions, and common sense about factors and components. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 47–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Steiger, J.H. (1990). Some additional thoughts on components, factors, and factor indeterminacy. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 47–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Tucker, L. R., Koopman, R. F., & Linn, R. L. (1969). Evaluation of factor analytic research procedures by means of simulated correlation matrices. Psychometrika, 34, 421–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Tucker, L.R., & Lewis, C. (1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihoodfactor analysis. Psychometrika, 38, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Velicer, W. F. (1976). Determining the number of components from the matrix of partial correlations. Psychometrika, 31, 321–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Velicer, W. F. & Fava, J. L. (1987). An evaluation of the effects of variable sampling on component, image, and factor analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 22, 193–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Velicer, W. F. & Fava, J. S. (1998). The effects of variable and subject sampling on factor pattern recovery. Psychological Methods, 3, 231–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Velicer, W. F., Fava, J. L., Zwick, W. R., & Harrop, J. W. (1990). CAX (Computer program). Kingston, RI: University of Rhode IslandGoogle Scholar
  67. Velicer, W. F., & Jackson, D. N. (1990a). Component analysis versus common factor analysis: Some issues in selecting an appropriate procedure. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Velicer, W. F., & Jackson, D. N. (1990b). Component analysis versus common factor analysissome further observations. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 97–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Velicer, W. F., Peacock, A. C., & Jackson, D. N. (1982). A comparison of component and factor patterns: A Monte Carlo approach. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 17, 371–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Widaman, K. F. (1990). Bias in pattern loadings represented by common factor analysis and component analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 89–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Wood, J.M., Tataryn, D. J., & Gorsuch, R. L. (1996). Effects of Under-and overextraction on principal axis factor analysis with varimax rotation. Psychological Methods, 1, 254–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Yeomans, K. A. & Golder, P. A. (1982). The Guttman-Kaiser criterion as a predictor of the number of common factors. The Statistician, 31, 221–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Zwick, W. R. & Velicer W. F. (1982). Factors influencing four rules for determining the number of components to retain. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 17, 253–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Zwick, W. R. & Velicer W. F. (1986). Comparison of five rules for determining the number of components to retain. Psychological Bulletin, 99, 432–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wayne F. Velicer
  • Cheryl A. Eaton
  • Joseph L. Fava

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations