The increasing popularity of structural equation models that correct for attenuation due to measurement error is noted. The methods by which structural models correct for the effects of measurement error are reviewed. Next, implications of such disattenuation for interpreting the results of structural equation models are considered. Recommendations are advanced for addressing the practice of disattenuation, and caution is urged in drawing inferences based on disattenuated parameter estimates.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Educational Research Association/American Psychological Association/National Council on Measurement in Education . (1985). Standards for educational and psychological tests. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
2.
Anderson, J. C. , & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 441-423.
3.
Bacon, D. R. , Sauer, P. L., & Young, M. (1995). Composite reliability in structural equation modeling. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 55, 394-406.
4.
Bagozzi, R. P. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: A comment. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 375-381.
5.
Baumrind, D. (1983). Specious causal attributions in the social sciences: The reformulated stepping-stone theory of heroin use as exemplar. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 1289-1298.
6.
Bedrick, E. J. (1995). A note on the attenuation of correlation. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 48, 271-280.
7.
Bentler, P. M. (1989). EQS structural equations program manual. Los Angeles: BMDP Statistical Software.
8.
Blalock, H. M., Jr. (1965). Some implications of random measurement error for causal inferences. American Journal of Sociology, 71, 3747.
9.
Block, J. (1963). The equivalence of measures and the correction for attenuation. Psychological Bulletin, 60, 152-156.
10.
Bobko, P. (1983). An analysis of correlations corrected for attenuation and range restriction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 584-589.
11.
Bobko, P. , & Rieck, A. (1980). Large sample estimators for standard errors of functions of correlation coefficients. Applied Psychological Measurement, 4, 385-398.
12.
Bohrnstedt, G. (1993). Classical measurement theory: Its utility and limitations for attitude research. In D. Krebs & P. Schmidt (Eds.), New directions in attitude measurement (pp. 169-186). Hawthorne, NY: Aldine.
13.
Bollen, K. A. (1984). Multiple indicators: Internal consistency or no necessary relationship?Quality & Quantity, 18, 377-385.
14.
Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: John Wiley.
15.
Bollen, K. A. , & Lennox, R. (1991). Conventional wisdom on measurement: A structural perspective. Psychological Bulletin, 110, 305-314.
16.
Bookstein, F. L. (1986). The elements of latent variable models. A cautionary lecture. Advances in Developmental Psychology, 4, 203-230.
17.
Carroll, R. J. , & Stefanski, L. A. (1994). Measurement error, instrumental variables and corrections for attenuation with applications to meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine, 13, 1265-1282.
18.
Clogg, C. C. (1992). The impact of sociological methodology on statistical methodology. Statistical Science, 7, 183-207.
19.
Cohen, J. , & Cohen, P. (1983). Multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
20.
Cohen, P. , Cohen, J., Teresi, J., Marchi, M., & Velez, C. N. (1990). Problems in the measurement of latent variables in structural equations causal models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 14, 183-196.
21.
Cortina, J. M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 98-104.
22.
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 48, 99-111.
23.
Dillon, W. R. , Kumar, A., & Mulani, N. (1987). Offending estimates in covariance structure analysis: Comments on the causes of solutions to Heywood cases. Psychological Bulletin, 101, 126-135.
24.
Duncan, O. D. (1975). Introduction to structural equation models. New York: Academic Press.
25.
Feldt, L. S. , & Brennan, R. L. (1988). Reliability. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed., pp. 105-146). New York: Macmillan.
26.
Forsyth, R. A. , & Feldt, L. S. (1969). An investigation of empirical sampling distributions of correlation coefficients corrected for attenuation. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 29, 61-71.
27.
Freedman, D. A. (1991). Statistical models and shoe leather. Sociological Methodology, 21, 291-358.
28.
Gavin. M. B. , & Williams, L. J. (in press). An empirical assessment of measurement models in job satisfaction research. Advances in research methods and analyses for organizational studies.
29.
Huba, G. J. , & Bentler, P. M. (1982). On the usefulness of latent variable causal modeling in testing theories of naturally occurring events (including adolescent drug use): A rejoinder to Martin. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 604-611.
30.
Huba, G. J. , & Harlow, L. L. (1987). Robust structural equation models: Implications for developmental psychology. Child Development, 58, 147-166.
31.
Jöreskog, K. G. (1970). A general model for analysis of covariance structures. Biometrika, 57, 293-351.
32.
Jöreskog, K. G. (1993). Testing structural equation models. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 294-316). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
33.
Jöreskog, K. G. , & Sorbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8 user's guide. Chicago: Scientific Software International.
34.
Kelloway, E. K. (1996). Common practices in structural equation modeling. International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 11, 141-180.
35.
Kessler, R. C. , & Greenberg, D. F. (1981). Linear panel analysis: Models of quantitative change. New York: Academic Press.
36.
MacCullum, R. C. , & Browne, M. W. (1993). The use of causal indicators in covariance structure models: Some practical issues. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 533-541.
37.
MacCullum, R. C. , Browne, M. W., & Sugawara, H. M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1, 130-149.
38.
Marsh, H. W. , & Balla, J. (1994). Goodness-of-fit in confirmatory factor analysis: The effects of sample size and model parsimony. Quality & Quantity, 28, 185-217.
39.
McNemar, Q. (1969). Psychological statistics (4th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
40.
Muchinsky, P. M. (1996). The correction for attenuation. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56, 63-75.
41.
Pedhazur, E. J. , & Schmelkin, L. P. (1991). Measurement, design, and analysis: An integrated approach. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. BEDEIAN et al.
42.
Peterson, R. A. (1994). A meta-analysis of Cronbach's coefficient alpha. Journal of Consumer Research, 21, 381-391.
43.
Reddy, S. K. (1992). Effects of ignoring correlated measurement error in structural equation models. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 52, 549-570.
44.
Reuterberg, S-E. , & Gustafsson, J-E. (1992). Confirmatory factor analysis and reliability: Testing measurement model assumptions. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 52, 795-811.
45.
Rogers, W. T. (1976). Jackknifing disattenuated correlations. Psychometrika, 41, 121-133.
46.
Rosenthal, R. (1984). Meta-analytic procedures for social research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
47.
Schmidt, F. L. , & Hunter, J. E. (1996). Measurement error in psychological research: Lessons from 26 research scenarios. Psychological Methods, 1, 199-223.
48.
Spearman, C. (1904). The proof and measurement of association between two things. American Journal of Psychology, 15, 72-101.
49.
Williams. L. J. (1995). Covariance structure modeling in organizational research: Problems with the method vs. applications of the method. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 16, 225-234.
50.
Williams, L. J. , & James, L. R. (1994). Causal models in organizational behavior research: From path analysis to LISREL and beyond. In J. Greenberg (Ed.), Organizational behavior: State of the art (pp. 181-205). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
51.
Won, E.Y.T. (1982). Incomplete corrections for regressor unreliabilities: Effects on the coefficient estimates. Sociological Methods & Research, 10, 271-284.
52.
Zimmernan, D. W. , Zumbo, B. D., & Lalonde, C. (1993). Coefficient alpha as an estimate of test reliability under violation of two assumptions. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53, 33-49.
