Information matrix estimation procedures for cognitive diagnostic models

Two new methods to estimate the asymptotic covariance matrix for marginal maximum likelihood estimation of cognitive diagnosis models (CDMs), the inverse of the observed information matrix and the sandwich-type estimator, are introduced. Unlike several previous covariance matrix estimators, the new methods take into account both the item and structural parameters. The relationships between the observed information matrix, the empirical cross-product information matrix, the sandwich-type covariance matrix and the two approaches proposed by de la Torre (2009, J. Educ. Behav. Stat., 34, 115) are discussed. Simulation results show that, for a correctly specified CDM and Q-matrix or with a slightly misspecified probability model, the observed information matrix and the sandwich-type covariance matrix exhibit good performance with respect to providing consistent standard errors of item parameter estimates. However, with substantial model misspecification only the sandwich-type covariance matrix exhibits robust performance.     

Four Covariance Structure Models for Canonical Correlation Analysis: A COSAN Modeling Approach

The mathematical connection between canonical correlation analysis (CCA) and covariance structure analysis was first discussed through the Multiple Indicators and Multiple Causes (MIMIC) approach. However, the MIMIC approach has several technical and practical challenges. To address these challenges, a comprehensive COSAN modeling approach is proposed. Specifically, we define four COSAN-CCA models to correspond with four possible combinations of the data to be analyzed and the unique parameters to be estimated. In terms of the data, one can analyze either the unstandardized or standardized variables. In terms of the unique parameters, one can estimate either the weights or loadings. Besides the unique parameters of each COSAN-CCA model, all four COSAN-CCA models also estimate the canonical correlations as their common parameters. Taken together, the four COSAN-CCA models provide the correct point estimates and standard error estimates for all commonly used CCA parameters. Two numeric examples are used to compare the standard error estimates obtained from the MIMIC approach and the COSAN modeling approach. Moreover, the standard error estimates from the COSAN modeling approach are validated by a simulation study and the asymptotic theory. Finally, software implementation and future extensions are discussed.     

A molar view of goal direction and habit

When we treat behavior within an evolutionary framework and as temporally extended flow, two fundamental questions arise: (a) What is an organism? and (b) What is behavior? An organism is a process that stays intact by constantly exchanging energy with the environment. It takes in resources and puts out waste. The behavior of an organism consists of those process parts of the organism process that make up the exchange. These activities serve the function of reproducing, which generally depends on surviving. Surviving and reproducing depend on responding to phylogenetically important events (PIEs). A PIE induces activities that enhance or mitigate the PIE. Organisms respond not only to a PIE but also to events that covary with the PIE. Both activities and environmental features may covary with a PIE. When either type of covariance is introduced to an organism, behavior adapts over time. The early stages of adaptation constitute what researchers call “goal direction,” and the later stages constitute what researchers call “habit.” Behavior and environment constitute a dynamic system, and manipulations of the covariances and environmental features of the system allow many experimental interventions. This molar approach allows experiments on goal direction and habit to be understood without appeal to everyday mentalistic terms.     

Identifying Variables Responsible for Data not Missing at Random

When data are not missing at random (NMAR), maximum likelihood (ML) procedure will not generate consistent parameter estimates unless the missing data mechanism is correctly modeled. Understanding NMAR mechanism in a data set would allow one to better use the ML methodology. A survey or questionnaire may contain many items; certain items may be responsible for NMAR values in other items. The paper develops statistical procedures to identify the responsible items. By comparing ML estimates (MLE), statistics are developed to test whether the MLEs are changed when excluding items. The items that cause a significant change of the MLEs are responsible for the NMAR mechanism. Normal distribution is used for obtaining the MLEs; a sandwich-type covariance matrix is used to account for distribution violations. The class of nonnormal distributions within which the procedure is valid is provided. Both saturated and structural models are considered. Effect sizes are also defined and studied. The results indicate that more missing data in a sample does not necessarily imply more significant test statistics due to smaller effect sizes. Knowing the true population means and covariances or the parameter values in structural equation models may not make things easier either. The research was supported by NSF grant DMS04-37167, the James McKeen Cattell Fund.     

An alternative two stage least squares (2SLS) estimator for latent variable equations

The Maximum-likelihood estimator dominates the estimation of general structural equation models. Noniterative, equation-by-equation estimators for factor analysis have received some attention, but little has been done on such estimators for latent variable equations. I propose an alternative 2SLS estimator of the parameters in LISREL type models and contrast it with the existing ones. The new 2SLS estimator allows observed and latent variables to originate from nonnormal distributions, is consistent, has a known asymptotic covariance matrix, and is estimable with standard statistical software. Diagnostics for evaluating instrumental variables are described. An empirical example illustrates the estimator. I gratefully acknowledge support for this research from the Sociology Program of the National Science Foundation (SES-9121564) and the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, Stanford, California. This paper was presented at the Interdisciplinary Consortium for Statistical Applications at Indiana University at Bloomington (March 2, 1994) and at the RMD Conference on Causal Modeling at Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana (March 3-5, 1994).     

A note on distributional properties of the Jöreskog-Sörbom fit indices

In introducing the LISREL model for systems of linear structural equations, Jöreskog and Sörbom proposed two goodness-of-fit indices, GFI and AGFI. Their asymptotic distributions and some statistical properties are discussed.The authors would like to acknowledge the helpful comments and suggestions from the Associate Editor and two anonymous reviewers.     

Effect analysis and causation in linear structural equation models

This paper considers total and direct effects in linear structural equation models. Adopting a causal perspective that is implicit in much of the literature on the subject, the paper concludes that in many instances the effects do not admit the interpretations imparted in the literature. Drawing a distinction between concomitants and factors, the paper concludes that a concomitant has neither total nor direct effects on other variables. When a variable is a factor and one or more intervening variables are concomitants, the notion of a direct effect is not causally meaningful. Even when the notion of a direct effect is meaningful, the usual estimate of this quantity may be inappropriate. The total effect is usually interpreted as an equilibrium multiplier. In the case where there are simultaneity relations among the dependent variables in tghe model, the results in the literature for the total effects of dependent variables on other dependent variables are not equilibrium multipliers, and thus, the usual interpretation is incorrect. To remedy some of these deficiencies, a new effect, the total effect of a factorX on an outcomeY, holding a set of variablesF constant, is defined. When defined, the total and direct effects are a special case of this new effect, and the total effect of a dependent variable on a dependent variable is an equilibrium multiplier.For helpful comments, I am grateful to G. Arminger, K. Bollen, W. Faris, R. m. Hauser, T. Petersen, three anonymous Psychometrikas reviewers, and the Editor. For computational assistance, I am grateful to B. D. Kim.     

Some contributions to efficient statistics in structural models: Specification and estimation of moment structures

Current practice in structural modeling of observed continuous random variables is limited to representation systems for first and second moments (e.g., means and covariances), and to distribution theory based on multivariate normality. In psychometrics the multinormality assumption is often incorrect, so that statistical tests on parameters, or model goodness of fit, will frequently be incorrect as well. It is shown that higher order product moments yield important structural information when the distribution of variables is arbitrary. Structural representations are developed for generalizations of the Bentler-Weeks, Jöreskog-Keesling-Wiley, and factor analytic models. Some asymptotically distribution-free efficient estimators for such arbitrary structural models are developed. Limited information estimators are obtained as well. The special case of elliptical distributions that allow nonzero but equal kurtoses for variables is discussed in some detail. The argument is made that multivariate normal theory for covariance structure models should be abandoned in favor of elliptical theory, which is only slightly more difficult to apply in practice but specializes to the traditional case when normality holds. Many open research areas are described.     

Power of the likelihood ratio test in covariance structure analysis

A procedure for computing the power of the likelihood ratio test used in the context of covariance structure analysis is derived. The procedure uses statistics associated with the standard output of the computer programs commonly used and assumes that a specific alternative value of the parameter vector is specified. Using the noncentral Chi-square distribution, the power of the test is approximated by the asymptotic one for a sequence of local alternatives. The procedure is illustrated by an example. A Monte Carlo experiment also shows how good the approximation is for a specific case.This research was made possible by a grant from the Dutch Organization for Advancement of Pure Research (ZWO). The authors also like to acknowledge the helpful comments and suggestions from the editor and anonymous reviewers.