Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40169454›Full record

ArticleBehavior research methods2025

The simulation-cum-ROC approach: A new approach to generate tailored cutoffs for fit indices through simulation and ROC analysis.

Katharina Groskurth, Nivedita Bhaktha, Clemens M Lechner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Behavior research methods, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

3 authors.

Katharina GroskurthGraduate School of Economic and Social Sciences, University of Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany. katharina.groskurth@gmx.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5933-5380
Nivedita BhakthaGESIS - Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences, Mannheim, Germany.
Clemens M LechnerGESIS - Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences, Mannheim, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To evaluate model fit in structural equation modeling, researchers commonly compare fit indices against fixed cutoff values (e.g., CFI ≥ .950). However, methodologists have cautioned against overgeneralizing cutoffs, highlighting that cutoffs permit valid judgments of model fit only in empirical settings similar to the simulation scenarios from which these cutoffs originate. This is because fit indices are not only sensitive to misspecification but are also susceptible to various model, estimation, and data characteristics. As a solution, methodologists have proposed four principal approaches to obtain so-called tailored cutoffs, which are generated specifically for a given setting. Here, we review these approaches. We find that none of these approaches provides guidelines on which fit index (out of all fit indices of interest) is best suited for evaluating whether the model fits the data in the setting of interest. Therefore, we propose a novel approach combining a Monte Carlo simulation with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. This so-called simulation-cum-ROC approach generates tailored cutoffs and additionally identifies the most reliable fit indices in the setting of interest. We provide R code and a Shiny app for an easy implementation of the approach. No prior knowledge of Monte Carlo simulations or ROC analysis is needed to generate tailored cutoffs with the simulation-cum-ROC approach.

Indexed as

Computer SimulationModels, StatisticalROC CurveHumansMonte Carlo MethodConfirmatory factor analysisCutoffFit indicesROCStructural equation modeling

Identifiers

PMID40169454
PMCPMC11961472

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.