Skip to main content
Log in

Finite mixtures in confirmatory factor-analysis models

  • Published:
Psychometrika Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper, various types of finite mixtures of confirmatory factor-analysis models are proposed for handling data heterogeneity. Under the proposed mixture approach, observations are assumed to be drawn from mixtures of distinct confirmatory factor-analysis models. But each observation does not need to be identified to a particular model prior to model fitting. Several classes of mixture models are proposed. These models differ by their unique representations of data heterogeneity. Three different sampling schemes for these mixture models are distinguished. A mixed type of the these three sampling schemes is considered throughout this article. The proposed mixture approach reduces to regular multiple-group confirmatory factor-analysis under a restrictive sampling scheme, in which the structural equation model for each observation is assumed to be known. By assuming a mixture of multivariate normals for the data, maximum likelihood estimation using the EM (Expectation-Maximization) algorithm and the AS (Approximate-Scoring) method are developed, respectively. Some mixture models were fitted to a real data set for illustrating the application of the theory. Although the EM algorithm and the AS method gave similar sets of parameter estimates, the AS method was found computationally more efficient than the EM algorithm. Some comments on applying the mixture approach to structural equation modeling are made.

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

  • Aitkin, M., & Wilson, G. T. (1980). Mixture models, outliers, & the EM algorithm.Technometrics, 22, 325–331.

    Google Scholar 

  • Behboodian, J. (1970). On a mixture of normal distributions.Biometrika, 57, 215–217.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bentler, P. M., Lee, S.-Y., & Weng, L.-J. (1987). Multiple population covariance structure analysis under arbitrary distribution theory.Communications in Statistics-Theory and Methods, 16, 1951–1964.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacharya, C. G. (1967). A simple method of resolution of a distribution into Gaussian components.Biometrics, 23, 115–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blåfield, E. (1980). Clustering of observations from finite mixtures with structural information.Jyvaskyla Studies in Computer Science, Economics & Statistics 2. Jyvaskyla University, Finland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bollen, K. A. (1989).Structural Equations with Latent Variables. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Browne, M. W. (1982). Covariance structures. In D. M. Hawkins (Ed.),Topics in applied multivariate analysis (pp. 72–141). London: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Browne, M. W. (1984). Asymptotically distribution-free methods for the analysis of covariance structures.British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 37, 62–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Choi, K. (1969). Estimators for the parameters of a finite mixture of distributions.The Annals of Institute of Statistical Mathematics, 21, 107–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Choi, K., & Bulgren, W. B. (1968). An estimation procedure for mixtures of distributions.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 30, 444–460.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crawford, S. L., DeGroot, M. H., Kadane, J. B., & Small, M. J. (1992). Modeling lake-chemistry distribution: Approximate Bayesian methods for estimating a finite mixture model.Technometrics, 34, 441–455.

    Google Scholar 

  • Day, N. E. (1969). Estimating the components of a mixture of normal distributions.Biometrika, 56, 463–474.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dempster, A. P., Laird, N. M., & Rubin, D. B. (1977). Maximum likelihood estimation from incomplete data via the EM algorithm.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 39, 1–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Do, K., & McLachlan, G. J. (1984). Estimation of mixing proportions: A case study.Applied Statistics, 33, 134–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Everitt, B. S., & Hand, D. J. (1981).Finite mixture distributions. London: Chapman and Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fryer, J. G., & Robertson, C. A. (1972). A comparison of some methods for estimating mixed normal distributions.Biometrika, 59, 639–648.

    Google Scholar 

  • Furman, W. D., & Lindsay, B. G. (1994b). Measuring the relative effectiveness of moment estimators as starting values in maximizing mixture likelihoods.Computational Statistics and Data Analysis, 17, 473–492.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ganesalingam, S., & McLachlan, G. J. (1981). Some efficiency results for the estimation of the mixing proportion in a mixture of two normal distributions.Biometrics, 37, 23–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldfeld, S. M., & Quandt, R. E. (1976).Studies in Nonlinear Estimation. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartigan, J. A. (1977). Distribution problems in clustering. In J. van Ryzin (Ed.),Classification and clustering (pp. 54–71). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartley, M. J. (1978). Comments on a paper by Quandt and Ramsey.Journal of the American Statistical Association, 73, 738–741.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hasselblad, V. (1966). Estimation of parameters for a mixture of normal distributions.Technometrics, 8, 431–444.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hasselblad, V. (1967).Finite mixtures of distributions from the exponential family. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, UCLA, California.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hathaway, R. J. (1985). A constrained formulation of maximum-likelihood estimation for normal mixture distributions.The Annals of Statistics, 13, 795–800.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hathaway, R. J. (1986). A constrained EM algorithm for univariate normal mixtures.Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation, 23, 211–230.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holzinger, K. J., & Swineford, F. (1939). A study in factor analysis: The stability of a bi-factor solution.Supplementary Educational Monographs, 48.

  • Hosmer, D. W. (1974). Maximum likelihood estimates of the parameters of a mixture of two regression lines.Communication in Statistics-Theory and Methods, 3, 995–1006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hosmer, D. W., & Dick, N. P. (1977). Information and mixtures of two normal distributions.Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation, 6, 137–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • John, S. (1970). On identifying the population of origin of each observation in a mixture of observations from two normal populations.Technometrics, 12, 553–563.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R. A., & Wichern, D. W. (1988).Applied Multivariate Statistical Analysis (2nd ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jöreskog, K. G. (1971). Simultaneous factor analysis in several populations.Psychometrika, 57, 409–426.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kano, Y., Berkane, M., & Bentler, P. M. (1990). Covariance structure analysis with heterogeneous kurtosis parameters.Biometrika, 77, 575–585.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kiefer, N. M. (1978). Discrete parameter variation: Efficient estimation of a switching regression model.Econometrica, 46, 427–434.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S.-Y., & Tsui, K. L. (1982). Covariance structure analysis in several populations.Psychometrika, 47, 297–308.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehmann, E. L. (1980). Efficient Likelihood Estimators.The American Statistician, 34, 233–235.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindsay, B. G. (1989). Moment matrices: Applications in mixtures.The Annals of Statistics, 13, 435–475.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindsay, B. G., & Basak, P. (1993). Multivariate normal mixtures: A fast consistent method of moments.Journal of the American Statistical Association, 88, 468–476.

    Google Scholar 

  • Magnus, J. R., & Neudecker, H. (1988).Matrix differential calculus with applications in statistics and econometrics. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • McLachlan, G. J. (1982). The classification and mixture mixture likelihood approaches to cluster analysis. In P. R. Krishnaiah & L. N. Kanal (Eds.):Handbook of statistics, Vol.2 (pp. 199–208).

    Google Scholar 

  • McLachlan, G. J., & Basford, K. E. (1988).Mixture models: Inference and applications to clustering. New York: Marcel Dekker.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Odell, P. L., & Basu, J. P. (1976). Concerning several methods for estimating crop acreages using remote sensing data.Communications in Statistics-Theory and Methods, 5, 1091–1114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, K. (1894). Contribution to the mathematical theory of evolution.Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, Series A, 185, 71–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Please, N. W. (1973). Comparison of factor loadings in different populations.British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 26, 61–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quandt, R. E. (1972). A new approach to estimating switching regressions.Journal of the American Statistical Association, 67, 306–310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quandt, R. E., & Ramsey, J. B. (1978). Estimating mixtures of normal distributions and switching regressions.Journal of the American Statistical Association, 73, 730–738.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rajagopalan, M., & Loganathan, A. (1991). Bayes estimates of mixing proportions in finite mixture distributions.Communications in Statistics-Theory and Methods, 20, 2337–2349.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao, C. R. (1952).Advanced statistical methods in biometric research. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Redner, R. A., & Walker, H. F. (1984). Mixture densities, maximum likelihood and the EM algorithm.SIAM Review, 26, 195–239.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, D. B., & Thayer, D. T. (1982). EM algorithms for ML factor analysis.Psychometrika, 47, 69–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • SAS Institute (1990).SAS/IML Software: Usage and Reference (version 6). Cary, NC: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schoenberg, R., & Richtand, C. (1984). Application of the EM method.Sociological Methods and Research, 13, 127–150.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schork, N. (1992). Bootstrapping likelihood ratios in quantitative genetics. In R. LePage & L. Billard (Eds.),Exploring the limits of bootstrap (pp. 389–396). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sclove, S. C. (1977). Population mixture models and clustering algorithms.Communications in Statistics-Theory and Methods, Series A, 6, 417–434.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, A. J., & Symons, M. J. (1971). Clustering methods based on likelihood ratio criteria.Biometrics, 27, 238–397.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A. F. M., & Makov, U. E. (1978). A quasi-Bayes sequential procedures for mixtures.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 40, 106–111.

    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 

  • Sundberg, R. (1976). An iterative method for solution of the likelihood equations for incomplete data from exponential families.Communications in Statistics-Simulation and Computation, 5, 55–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Symons, M. J. (1981). Clustering criteria and multivariate normal mixtures.Biometrics, 37, 35–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tan, W. Y., & Chang, W. C. (1972). Some comparisons of the method of moments and the method of maximum likelihood in estimating parameters of a mixture of two normal densities.Journal of the American Statistical Association, 67, 702–708.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teicher, H. (1960). On the mixture of distributions.The Annals of the Mathematical Statistics, 31, 55–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teicher, H. (1961). Identifiability of mixtures.The Annals of the Mathematical Statistics, 32, 244–248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teicher, H. (1963). Identifiability of finite mixtures.The Annals of the Mathematical Statistics, 34, 1265–1269.

    Google Scholar 

  • Titerington, D. M. (1990). Some recent research in the analysis of mixture distributions.Statistics, 21, 619–641.

    Google Scholar 

  • Titterington, D. M., Smith, A. F. M., & Makov, U. E. (1985).Statistical analysis of finite mixture distributions. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolfe, J. H. (1970). Pattern clustering by multivariate mixture analysis.Multivariate Behavioral Research, 5, 329–350.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yakowitz, S. J. (1969). A consistent estimators for the identification of finite mixtures.The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 39, 209–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yakowitz, S. J., & Spragins, J. D. (1968). On the identifiability of finite mixtures.The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 39, 1728–1735.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yung, Y. F. (1995).Finite mixtures in confirmatory factor-analytic models (microfilm). Ann Arbor, MI: Univesity Microfilms.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Note: This paper is one of the Psychometric Society's 1995 Dissertation Award papers.—Editor

This article is based on the dissertation of the author. The author would like to thank Peter Bentler, who was the dissertation chair, for guidance and encouragement of this work. Eric Holman, Robert Jennrich, Bengt Muthén, and Thomas Wickens, who served as the committee members for the dissertation, had been very supportive and helpful. Michael Browne is appreciated for discussing some important points about the use of the approximate information in the dissertation. Thanks also go to an anonymous associate editor, whose comments were very useful for the revision of an earlier version of this article.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Yung, YF. Finite mixtures in confirmatory factor-analysis models. Psychometrika 62, 297–330 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02294554

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02294554

Key words

Navigation