The performance of unweighted least squares and regularized unweighted least squares in estimating factor loadings in structural equation modeling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a confirmatory study, researchers are expected to employ the covariance-based structural equation modeling (CB-SEM). One of the key presumptions when utilizing CB-SEM is that the data is multivariate normal. Nevertheless, a perfect normal distribution is rarely observed in real-life data. To resolve this, the unweighted least square (ULS) is designed to specifically deal with non-normal data in SEM. However, ULS often yields improper solutions like negative, or boundary estimates of unique variances since it considers measurement errors in observed variables. The disturbance in SEM is reflected in unique variance, which is random error due to unreliability or measurement error and reliable variation in the item that indicates unknown latent causes. Consequently, this can generate bias in indicator loadings estimates. As an action to disentangle this issue, the present study proposes the implementation of regularization parameters by adding small positive values to the variance-covariance matrix. The ratio of bias to variance in a model can be improved to obtain the best estimation performance. Pro-Active Monte Carlo simulation was used to produce multivariate non-normal data with designated sample sizes and population characteristics. The data were analyzed using R Programming Environment by employing “psych”, “MASS”, “foreign”, “mvrnonnorm”, “purr”, and “semTools” packages with 1000 replications to produce multivariate non-normal data. Next, the “lavaan” package was used for SEM and regularized SEM analyses. The outcome of this study proves the capability of regularized ULS to improve parameter estimation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.098 | 0.328 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".