Application of the bootstrap methods in factor analysis

A Monte Carlo experiment is conducted to investigate the performance of the bootstrap methods in normal theory maximum likelihood factor analysis both when the distributional assumption is satisfied and unsatisfied. The parameters and their functions of interest include unrotated loadings, analytically rotated loadings, and unique variances. The results reveal that (a) bootstrap bias estimation performs sometimes poorly for factor loadings and nonstandardized unique variances; (b) bootstrap variance estimation performs well even when the distributional assumption is violated; (c) bootstrap confidence intervals based on the Studentized statistics are recommended; (d) if structural hypothesis about the population covariance matrix is taken into account then the bootstrap distribution of the normal theory likelihood ratio test statistic is close to the corresponding sampling distribution with slightly heavier right tail.This study was carried out in part under the ISM cooperative research program (91-ISM · CRP-85, 92-ISM · CRP-102). The authors would like to thank the editor and three reviewers for their helpful comments and suggestions which improved the quality of this paper considerably.     

Testing whether independent treatment groups have equal medians

The paper suggests new methods for comparing the medians corresponding to independent treatment groups. The procedures are based on the Harrell-Davis estimator in conjunction with a slight modification and extension of the bootstrap calibration technique suggested by Loh. Alternatives to the Harrell-Davis estimator are briefly discussed. For the special case of two treatment groups, the proposed procedure always had more power than the Fligner-Rust solution, as well as the procedure examined by Wilcox and Charlin. Included is an illustration, using real data, that comparing medians, rather than means, can yield a substantially different conclusion as to whether two distributions differ in terms of some measure of central location.     

Problems with bootstrapping pearson correlations in very small bivariate samples

Efron'sMonte Carlo bootstrap algorithm is shown to cause degeneracies in Pearson'sr for sufficiently small samples. Two ways of preventing this problem when programming the bootstrap ofr are considered.     

Asymptotic Standard Errors of Generalized Partial Credit Model True Score Equating Using Characteristic Curve Methods

In this study, the delta method was applied to estimate the standard errors of the true score equating when using the characteristic curve methods with the generalized partial credit model in test equating under the context of the common-item nonequivalent groups equating design. Simulation studies were further conducted to compare the performance of the delta method with that of the bootstrap method and the multiple imputation method. The results indicated that the standard errors produced by the delta method were very close to the criterion empirical standard errors as well as those yielded by the bootstrap method and the multiple imputation method under all the manipulated conditions.     

Standard errors and confidence intervals for correlations corrected for indirect range restriction: A simulation study comparing analytic and bootstrap methods

A frequent topic of psychological research is the estimation of the correlation between two variables from a sample that underwent a selection process based on a third variable. Due to indirect range restriction, the sample correlation is a biased estimator of the population correlation, and a correction formula is used. In the past, bootstrap standard error and confidence intervals for the corrected correlations were examined with normal data. The present study proposes a large-sample estimate (an analytic method) for the standard error, and a corresponding confidence interval for the corrected correlation. Monte Carlo simulation studies involving both normal and non-normal data were conducted to examine the empirical performance of the bootstrap and analytic methods. Results indicated that with both normal and non-normal data, the bootstrap standard error and confidence interval were generally accurate across simulation conditions (restricted sample size, selection ratio, and population correlations) and outperformed estimates of the analytic method. However, with certain combinations of distribution type and model conditions, the analytic method has an advantage, offering reasonable estimates of the standard error and confidence interval without resorting to the bootstrap procedure's computer-intensive approach. We provide SAS code for the simulation studies.     

Testing autocorrelation and partial autocorrelation: Asymptotic methods versus resampling techniques

Autocorrelation and partial autocorrelation, which provide a mathematical tool to understand repeating patterns in time series data, are often used to facilitate the identification of model orders of time series models (e.g., moving average and autoregressive models). Asymptotic methods for testing autocorrelation and partial autocorrelation such as the 1/T approximation method and the Bartlett's formula method may fail in finite samples and are vulnerable to non-normality. Resampling techniques such as the moving block bootstrap and the surrogate data method are competitive alternatives. In this study, we use a Monte Carlo simulation study and a real data example to compare asymptotic methods with the aforementioned resampling techniques. For each resampling technique, we consider both the percentile method and the bias-corrected and accelerated method for interval construction. Simulation results show that the surrogate data method with percentile intervals yields better performance than the other methods. An R package pautocorr is used to carry out tests evaluated in this study.     

Positive expectancies and mental health: Identifying the unique contributions of hope and optimism

Contemporary theories of hope and optimism provide two explanations for how positive expectancies can shape human behavior and promote well-being. Scheier and Carver's theory of optimism focuses on generalized expectations of positive outcomes, whereas Snyder's hope theory focuses on how evaluations of personal agency can facilitate goal attainment. Although the theoretical distinctions between these constructs have previously been articulated, few studies have jointly examined the two constructs in order to determine unique effects, and some have questioned whether the constructs are truly distinct. This study therefore examines whether hope and optimism (1) are distinct latent constructs, (2) have unique effects on components of flourishing mental health, and (3) differentially relate to the components of flourishing mental health. Confirmatory factor analysis results and a bootstrapped structural equation model indicate that hope and optimism are distinct latent constructs that each uniquely predict a moderate proportion of variance of the components of well-being.     

中介效应的检验方法和效果量测量:回顾与展望

通过中介效应检验方法之间的比较和效果量指标之间的比较,建议放弃将总效应c显著作为中介效应检验的前提条件,放弃基于直接效应c'显著性的完全和部分中介的提法,推荐使用偏差校正的百分位Bootstrap法直接对中介效应ab进行检验,使用κ²、R_med²等中介效果量指标并报告效果量的置信区间。作为示例,用R软件的MBESS软件包对某消防员饮食健康调查进行了中介效应检验和效果量测量。随后展望了中介效应检验方法和效果量测量的拓展方向。     

Error-statistical elimination of alternative hypotheses

I consider the error-statistical account as both a theory of evidence and as a theory of inference. I seek to show how inferences regarding the truth of hypotheses can be upheld by avoiding a certain kind of alternative hypothesis problem. In addition to the testing of assumptions behind the experimental model, I discuss the role of judgments of implausibility. A benefit of my analysis is that it reveals a continuity in the application of error-statistical assessment to low-level empirical hypotheses and highly general theoretical principles. This last point is illustrated with a brief sketch of the issues involved in the parametric framework analysis of tests of physical theories such as General Relativity and of fundamental physical principles such as the Einstein Equivalence Principle.     

Comparing variances of correlated variables

A test is proposed for the equality of the variances ofk 2 correlated variables. Pitman's test fork = 2 reduces the null hypothesis to zero correlation between their sum and their difference. Its extension, eliminating nuisance parameters by a bootstrap procedure, is valid for any correlation structure between thek normally distributed variables. A Monte Carlo study for several combinations of sample sizes and number of variables is presented, comparing the level and power of the new method with previously published tests. Some nonnormal data are included, for which the empirical level tends to be slightly higher than the nominal one. The results show that our method is close in power to the asymptotic tests which are extremely sensitive to nonnormality, yet it is robust and much more powerful than other robust tests.This research was supported by the fund for the promotion of research at the Technion.