The importance of modeling method effects

Resolving the (Uni)dimensionality of the Loneliness Questionnaire

Chad Ebesutani, Christopher Drescher, Steven P. Reise, Laurie Heiden, Terry L. Hight, John D. Damon, John Young

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

13 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This study sought to resolve the dimensionality of the Loneliness Questionnaire (LQ; Asher, Hymel, & Renshaw, 1984) by applying recommended confirmatory factor analytic procedures that control for method effects (Brown, 2003). This study was needed given that inconsistent findings have been reported recently regarding the structure of this instrument (Bagner, Storch, & Roberti, 2004) and all models to date have not accounted for method effects due to the non-reversed-worded and reversed-worded items of this instrument. Using a large sample of youth in Grades 2 through 12 (N = 11,725), we compared the previously reported 1- and 2-factor models with a newly posited 1-factor model that incorporated correlated error terms to account for method effects. We found that the 1-factor model that included correlated error terms fit the data best, and that this factor structure evidenced measurement invariance across boys and girls in childhood, but not in adolescence. The meaning of the LQ indicators was also consistent for boys across development, but evidenced differences for girls in childhood versus adolescence. More generally, it was demonstrated that modeling method effects is vital to accurately understanding the dimensionality of loneliness when reversed-worded and non-reversed-worded items are used as indicators. The measurement and clinical implications of these findings are discussed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)186-195
Number of pages10
JournalJournal of Personality Assessment
Volume94
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2012
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Loneliness
Surveys and Questionnaires
Modeling
Questionnaire
Adolescence
Boys
Childhood

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Psychology
  • Psychiatry and Mental health
  • Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis

Cite this

The importance of modeling method effects : Resolving the (Uni)dimensionality of the Loneliness Questionnaire. / Ebesutani, Chad; Drescher, Christopher; Reise, Steven P.; Heiden, Laurie; Hight, Terry L.; Damon, John D.; Young, John.

In: Journal of Personality Assessment, Vol. 94, No. 2, 01.03.2012, p. 186-195.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Ebesutani, Chad ; Drescher, Christopher ; Reise, Steven P. ; Heiden, Laurie ; Hight, Terry L. ; Damon, John D. ; Young, John. / The importance of modeling method effects : Resolving the (Uni)dimensionality of the Loneliness Questionnaire. In: Journal of Personality Assessment. 2012 ; Vol. 94, No. 2. pp. 186-195.
@article{f0ac9669a92b46cc974d0741651459ec,
title = "The importance of modeling method effects: Resolving the (Uni)dimensionality of the Loneliness Questionnaire",
abstract = "This study sought to resolve the dimensionality of the Loneliness Questionnaire (LQ; Asher, Hymel, & Renshaw, 1984) by applying recommended confirmatory factor analytic procedures that control for method effects (Brown, 2003). This study was needed given that inconsistent findings have been reported recently regarding the structure of this instrument (Bagner, Storch, & Roberti, 2004) and all models to date have not accounted for method effects due to the non-reversed-worded and reversed-worded items of this instrument. Using a large sample of youth in Grades 2 through 12 (N = 11,725), we compared the previously reported 1- and 2-factor models with a newly posited 1-factor model that incorporated correlated error terms to account for method effects. We found that the 1-factor model that included correlated error terms fit the data best, and that this factor structure evidenced measurement invariance across boys and girls in childhood, but not in adolescence. The meaning of the LQ indicators was also consistent for boys across development, but evidenced differences for girls in childhood versus adolescence. More generally, it was demonstrated that modeling method effects is vital to accurately understanding the dimensionality of loneliness when reversed-worded and non-reversed-worded items are used as indicators. The measurement and clinical implications of these findings are discussed.",
author = "Chad Ebesutani and Christopher Drescher and Reise, {Steven P.} and Laurie Heiden and Hight, {Terry L.} and Damon, {John D.} and John Young",
year = "2012",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1080/00223891.2011.627967",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "94",
pages = "186--195",
journal = "Journal of Personality Assessment",
issn = "0022-3891",
publisher = "Taylor and Francis Ltd.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The importance of modeling method effects

T2 - Resolving the (Uni)dimensionality of the Loneliness Questionnaire

AU - Ebesutani, Chad

AU - Drescher, Christopher

AU - Reise, Steven P.

AU - Heiden, Laurie

AU - Hight, Terry L.

AU - Damon, John D.

AU - Young, John

PY - 2012/3/1

Y1 - 2012/3/1

N2 - This study sought to resolve the dimensionality of the Loneliness Questionnaire (LQ; Asher, Hymel, & Renshaw, 1984) by applying recommended confirmatory factor analytic procedures that control for method effects (Brown, 2003). This study was needed given that inconsistent findings have been reported recently regarding the structure of this instrument (Bagner, Storch, & Roberti, 2004) and all models to date have not accounted for method effects due to the non-reversed-worded and reversed-worded items of this instrument. Using a large sample of youth in Grades 2 through 12 (N = 11,725), we compared the previously reported 1- and 2-factor models with a newly posited 1-factor model that incorporated correlated error terms to account for method effects. We found that the 1-factor model that included correlated error terms fit the data best, and that this factor structure evidenced measurement invariance across boys and girls in childhood, but not in adolescence. The meaning of the LQ indicators was also consistent for boys across development, but evidenced differences for girls in childhood versus adolescence. More generally, it was demonstrated that modeling method effects is vital to accurately understanding the dimensionality of loneliness when reversed-worded and non-reversed-worded items are used as indicators. The measurement and clinical implications of these findings are discussed.

AB - This study sought to resolve the dimensionality of the Loneliness Questionnaire (LQ; Asher, Hymel, & Renshaw, 1984) by applying recommended confirmatory factor analytic procedures that control for method effects (Brown, 2003). This study was needed given that inconsistent findings have been reported recently regarding the structure of this instrument (Bagner, Storch, & Roberti, 2004) and all models to date have not accounted for method effects due to the non-reversed-worded and reversed-worded items of this instrument. Using a large sample of youth in Grades 2 through 12 (N = 11,725), we compared the previously reported 1- and 2-factor models with a newly posited 1-factor model that incorporated correlated error terms to account for method effects. We found that the 1-factor model that included correlated error terms fit the data best, and that this factor structure evidenced measurement invariance across boys and girls in childhood, but not in adolescence. The meaning of the LQ indicators was also consistent for boys across development, but evidenced differences for girls in childhood versus adolescence. More generally, it was demonstrated that modeling method effects is vital to accurately understanding the dimensionality of loneliness when reversed-worded and non-reversed-worded items are used as indicators. The measurement and clinical implications of these findings are discussed.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84859731082&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84859731082&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/00223891.2011.627967

DO - 10.1080/00223891.2011.627967

M3 - Article

VL - 94

SP - 186

EP - 195

JO - Journal of Personality Assessment

JF - Journal of Personality Assessment

SN - 0022-3891

IS - 2

ER -