Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38710985›Full record

ArticleBehavior research methods2024

Factor retention in ordered categorical variables: Benefits and costs of polychoric correlations in eigenvalue-based testing.

Nils Brandenburg

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Behavior research methods, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Nils BrandenburgDepartment of Experimental Psychology, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Universitätsstr. 1, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany. nils.brandenburg@hhu.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7497-9384

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

An essential step in exploratory factor analysis is to determine the optimal number of factors. The Next Eigenvalue Sufficiency Test (NEST; Achim, 2017) is a recent proposal to determine the number of factors based on significance tests of the statistical contributions of candidate factors indicated by eigenvalues of sample correlation matrices. Previous simulation studies have shown NEST to recover the optimal number of factors in simulated datasets with high accuracy. However, these studies have focused on continuous variables. The present work addresses the performance of NEST for ordinal data. It has been debated whether factor models - and thus also the optimal number of factors - for ordinal variables should be computed for Pearson correlation matrices, which are known to underestimate correlations for ordinal datasets, or for polychoric correlation matrices, which are known to be instable. The central research question is to what extent the problems associated with Pearson correlations and polychoric correlations deteriorate NEST for ordinal datasets. Implementations of NEST tailored to ordinal datasets by utilizing polychoric correlations are proposed. In a simulation, the proposed implementations were compared to the original implementation of NEST which computes Pearson correlations even for ordinal datasets. The simulation shows that substituting polychoric correlations for Pearson correlations improves the accuracy of NEST for binary variables and large sample sizes (N = 500). However, the simulation also shows that the original implementation using Pearson correlations was the most accurate implementation for Likert-type variables with four response categories when item difficulties were homogeneous.

Indexed as

Computer SimulationData Interpretation, StatisticalFactor Analysis, StatisticalHumansModels, StatisticalExploratory factor analysisFactor retentionNext Eigenvalue Sufficiency TestOrdinal variablesPolychoric correlations

Identifiers

PMID38710985
PMCPMC11362475

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.