Selecting the "correct" number of components to retain in principal components analysis is crucial. Parallel analysis, which requires a comparison of eigenvalues from observed and random data, is a highly promising strategy for making this decision. This paper focuses on linear interpolation, which has been shown to be an accurate method of implementing parallel analysis. Specifically, this article contains tables of 95th percentile eigenvalues from random data that can be used when the sample size is between 50 and 500 and when the number of variables is between 5 and 50. An empirical example is provided illustrating linear interpolation, direct computation, and regression methods for obtaining 95th percentile eigenvalues from random data. The tables of eigenvalues given in this report will hopefully enable more researchers to use parallel analysis because interpolation is an accurate and simple method of obviating the Monte Carlo requirements of parallel analysis.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Buja, A. and Eyuboglu, N. (1992). Remarks on parallel analysis.Multivariate Behavioral Research, 27, 509-540.
2.
Cattell, R. B. (1966). The scree test for the number of factors.Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1, 245-276.
3.
Clark, M. M. , Abrams, D. B., Niaura, R. S., Eaton, C. A., and Rossi, J. S. (1991). Self-efficacy in weight management.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 59, 739-744.
4.
Comrey, A. L. (1978). Common methodological problems in factor analytic studies.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 46, 648-659.
5.
Comrey, A. L. (1988). Factor-analytic methods of scale development in personality and clinical psychology.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 56, 754-761.
6.
Cota, A. A. , Longman, R. S., Holden, R. R., and Fekken, G. C. (1991). Anomalies in the Allen and Hubbard parallel analysis procedure.Applied Psychological Measurement, 15, 95-97.
7.
Cota, A. A. , Longman, R. S., Holden, R. R., and Fekken, G. C. (in press). Comparing different methods for implementing parallel analysis: A practical index of accuracy. EDUCATIONAL AND PSY- CHOLOGICAL MEASUREMENT
8.
Cota, A. A. and Xinaris, S. (in press). Factor structure of the Sex-Role Ideology Scale: Introducing a short form.Sex Roles.
9.
Crawford, C. B. and Koopman, P. (1973). A note on Horn's test for the number of factors in factor analysis.Multivariate Behavioral Research,8, 117-125.
10.
Franzen, M. D. and Golden, C. J. (1984). Multivariate statistical techniques in neuropsychology: II. Comparison of number of factors rules with the motor scale of the Luria-Nebraska Neuro- psychological Battery.International Journal of Clinical Neuropsychology,6, 165-171.
11.
Gorsuch, R. L. (1983). Factor analysis (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
12.
Guilford, J. P. (1952). When not to factor analyze.Psychological Bulletin,49, 26-37.
13.
Harshman, R. A. and Reddon, J. R. (1983, May). Determining the number of factors by comparing real with random data: A serious flaw and some possible corrections. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Classification Society of North America, Philadelphia.
14.
Holden, R. R. , Longman, R. S., Cota, A. A., and Fekken, G. C. (1989). PAR: Parallel analysis routine for random data eigenvalue estimation.Applied Psychological Measurement,13, 192.
15.
Horn, J. L. (1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis.Psychometrika,30, 179-185.
16.
Hubbard, R. and Allen, S. J. (1987). An empirical comparison of alternative methods for principal component extraction.Journal of Business Research, 15, 173-190.
17.
Kaiser, H. F. (1960). The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 141-151.
18.
Keelan, J. P. R. , Dion, K. K., and Dion, K. L. (1992). Correlates of appearance anxiety in late adolescence and early adulthood among young women.Journal of Adolescence, 15, 193-205.
19.
Lautenschlager, G. J. (1989a). A comparison of alternatives to conducting Monte Carlo analyses for determining parallel analysis criteria.Multivariate Behavioral Research,24, 365-395.
20.
Lautenschlager, G. J. (1989b). PARANAL.TOK: A program for developing parallel analysis criteria.Applied Psychological Measurement,13, 176.
21.
Longman, R. S. , Cota, A. A., Holden, R. R., and Fekken, G. C. (1989a). A regression equation for the parallel analysis criterion in principal components analysis: Mean and 95th percentile eigenvalues.Multivariate Behavioral Research,24, 59-69.
22.
Longman, R. S. , Cota, A. A., Holden, R. R., and Fekken, G. C. (1989b). PAM: A double-precision FORTRAN program for the parallel analysis method in principal components analysis.Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers,21, 477-480.
23.
Longman, R. S. , Cota, A. A., Holden, R. R., and Fekken, G. C. (1992). Implementing parallel analysis for principal components analysis: A comparison of six methods. Unpublished manuscript.
24.
Macmann, G. M. , Barnett, D. W., Burd, S. A., Jones, T., LeBuffe, P. A., O'Malley, D., Shade, D. B., and Wright, A. (1992). Construct validity of the Child Behavior Checklist: Effects of item overlap on second-order factor structure.Psychological Assessment, 4, 113-116.
25.
Reddon, J. R. (1984). The number of principal components problem: A Monte Carlo study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Western Ontario, London, Canada.
26.
Rummel, R. J. (1970). Applied factor analysis.Evanston: North- western University.
27.
Silverstein, A. B. (1990). Update on the parallel analysis criterion for determining the number of principal components.Psychological Reports, 67, 511-514.
28.
Skinner, H. A. (1979). Dimensions and clusters: A hybrid approach to classification.Applied Psychological Measurement,3, 327-341.
29.
Tracy, L. (1990). Treating factor interpretations as hypotheses.Social Behavior and Personality,18, 309-326.
30.
Velicer, W. F. and Jackson, D. N. (1990a). Component analysis versus common factor analysis: Some issues in selecting an appropriate technique.Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 1-28.
31.
Velicer, W. F. and Jackson, D. N. (1990b). Component analysis versus common factor analysis: Some further observations.Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 97-114.
32.
Zwick, W. R. and Velicer, W. F. (1986). Comparison of five rules for determining the number of components to retain.Psychological Bulletin,99, 432-442.
