Notice: On March 31, it was **announced** that Statalist is moving from an email list to a **forum**. The old list will shut down on April 23, and its replacement, **statalist.org** is already up and running.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

From |
"JVerkuilen (Gmail)" <jvverkuilen@gmail.com> |

To |
statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |

Subject |
Re: st: Hierarchical CFA problem |

Date |
Mon, 22 Apr 2013 08:32:04 -0500 |

On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 4:31 AM, W Robert Long <W.R.Long@leeds.ac.uk> wrote: The key is in the lavaan output: > L1 0.192 0.170 > L2 0.709 0.107 > L3 0.272 0.069 > G 0.617 0.183 Notice how small the variance of L1 is, and how large its SE is. This is indicative of a log-likelihood that is close to being irregular, in this case probably having a mode at or close to 0 for L1's variance. L3 has a slightly higher variance but a markedly lower standard error, which means it has a proper peak. While you shouldn't use these standard errors to compute hypothesis tests or confidence intervals, they are highly indicative of problems with a model. So I'm not surprised difficult cleaned things up. (lavaan is a nice piece of kit, by the way.) -- JVVerkuilen, PhD jvverkuilen@gmail.com “He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – for support rather than illumination.”--Andrew Lang * * For searches and help try: * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search * http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/resources/statalist-faq/ * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: st: Hierarchical CFA problem***From:*Alan Acock <acock@mac.com>

**References**:**st: Hierarchical CFA problem***From:*W Robert Long <W.R.Long@leeds.ac.uk>

- Prev by Date:
**Re: st: Hierarchical CFA problem** - Next by Date:
**Re: st: Nearstat competitor count** - Previous by thread:
**Re: st: Hierarchical CFA problem** - Next by thread:
**Re: st: Hierarchical CFA problem** - Index(es):