Objectives: Using baseline and second wave data, the study evaluated the measurement and structural properties of parenting stress, personal mastery, and economic strain with N = 381 lower income parents who decided to join and those who did not join in a child development savings account program. Methods: Structural equation modeling mean and covariance structures was performed across groups and occasion was performed. Results: Measurement invariance was established across groups and across occasions. However, parenting stress differed across occasions. Conclusions: SEM methods are useful in testing theories as well as comparing manifest and latent structures of constructs across groups and occasions.
AbidinR. (1992). The determinants of parenting behavior. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 21, 407–412. Retrieved fromhttp://www.jccap.net
2.
AdamsD. (2008). SEED Pre-School Demonstration and Impact Assessment. Research Brief, SEED Research at KU. Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas School of Social Welfare.
3.
AdamsD.Williams ShanksT. R.MarksE. (2008). SEED Pre-School Demonstration and Impact Assessment: Findings to Date. Research Brief, SEED Research at KU. Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas School of Social Welfare.
4.
BentlerP. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246.
5.
BentlerP. M.BonettD. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588–606.
6.
BerryJ. O.JonesW. H. (1995). The parental stress scale: Initial psychometric evidence. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 12, 463–472. doi:10.1177/0265407595123009
7.
BeverlyS. G.WilliamsShanks T. (2005). SEED Impact Assessment Survey: baseline Instrument in English and Spanish. Research Instrument, SEED Research at KU. Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas School of Social Welfare.
8.
BodnerT. E. (2007). Review of Missing data and small-area estimation: Modern analytical equipment for the survey statistician. Psychometrika, 72, 115–116.
9.
BollenK. A.CurranP. J. (2004). Autogressive latent trajectory (ALT) models. Av synthesis of two traditions. Sociological Methods and Research, 32, 336–387.
10.
BrownT. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
11.
BrowneM. W.CudeckR. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. B. J. S. Long (Ed.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
12.
CarterR. L. (2006). Solutions for missing data in structural equation modeling. Research & Practice in Assessment, 1, 1–6.
13.
CheungG. W.RensvoldR. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 233–255.
14.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum.
15.
CollinsL. M.SchaferJ. L.KamC. M. (2001). A comparison of inclusive and restrictive strategies in modern missing data procedures. Psychological methods, 6, 330–351.
16.
CongerR. D.CongerK. J. (2002). Resilience in Midwestern families: Selected Findings from the first decade of a prospective, longitudinal study. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 64, 361–373. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2002.00361.x
17.
CongerR. D.GeX. J.ElderG. H.JrLorenzF. O.SimonsR. L. (1994). Economic stress, coercive family process, and developmental problems of adolescents. Child Development, 65, 541–561. doi:10.111/j.1467-8624.1994.tb00768.x
18.
CongerR. D.WallaceL. E.SunY.SimonsR. L.McLoydV. C.BrodyG.H. (2002). Economic pressure in African American families: A replication and extension of the family stress model. Developmental Psychology, 38, 179–193. doi:10.1037//0012-1649.38.2.179
EndersC. K. (2006). A primer on the use of modern missing data methods in psychosomatic medicine research. Psychosomatic Medicine, 68, 427–736.
21.
EndersC. K. (2010). Applied missing data analysis. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
22.
EndersC. K.BandalosD. L. (2001). The relative performance of full information maximum likelihood estimation for missing data in structural equation models. Structural Equation Modeling, 8, 430–457.
23.
EndersC. K.GottschallA. C. (2011). Multiple imputation strategies for multiple group structural equation models. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 18, 35–54.
24.
GrahamJ. W. (2009). Missing data analysis: Making it work in the real world. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 549–576.
25.
GrahamJ. W.CumsilleP. E.Elek-FiskE. (2003). Methods for handling missing data(Vol. 2). New York, NY: Wiley.
26.
GrahamJ. W.OlchowskiA. E.GilreathT. D. (2007). How many imputations are really needed? Some practical clarifications of multiple imputation theory. Prevention Science, 8, 206–213.
27.
GrahamJ. W.TaylorB. J.OlchowskiA. E.CumsilleP. E. (2006). Planned missing data designs in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 11, 323–343.
28.
GuoB.PerronB. E.GillespieD. F. (2009). A systematic review of structural equation modeling in social work research. British Journal of Social Work, 39, 1556–1574. doi:10.1093/bjsw/bcn101
29.
HuL.BentlerP. M. (1999). Cut off criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55
KlineR. (1998). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: The Guilford Press.
32.
KlineR. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: The Guilford Press.
33.
KlineR. (2010). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
34.
LittleT. (1997). Mean and covariance structures (MACS) analyses of cross-cultural data: Practical and theoretical issues. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 32, 53–76.
35.
LittleT. D.CardN. A.SledgersD. W.LedfordE. C. (2007). Representing contextual effects in multiple-group MACS models. In LittleT. D.BovairdJ. A.CardN. A. (Eds.), Modeling contextual effects in longitudinal studies (pp. 121–147). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
36.
LittleT. D.CunninghamW. A.ShaharG. (2002). To parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question, weighing the merits. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 151–173.
37.
LittleT. D.SlegersD. W.CardN. A. (2006). A non-arbitrary method of identifying and scaling latent variables in SEM and MACS models. Structural Equation Modeling, 13, 59–72.
38.
MacCallumR. C.BrowneM. W. (1993). The use of casual indicators in covariance structure models: Some practical issues. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 533–541.
39.
MarksE.RhodesB. (2005). Saving for education, entrepreneurship and downpayment wave 1 survey—Fall 2004. Research Triangle Park, North Carolina: RTI International.
MorrisonD. R.ZaslowM. J.DionM. R. (1998). Completing the portrayal of parenting: Behavior with survey measures of parenting. In ZaslowM.EldredC. (Eds.), Parenting behavior in a sample of young mothers in poverty: Results of the New Chance Observational Stud (pp. 25–53). New York, NY: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation.
42.
OkechD. (2012). Evaluating the effects of child savings accounts program participation on parental well-being. Research on Social Work Practice, 22(4), 357–366.
43.
OkechD.LittleT. D.Williams ShanksT. R.AdamsD. (2011). Self-efficacy and joining a savings program for children’s education. Research on Social Work Practice, 21, 442–451. doi:10.1177/1049731510389079
44.
PearlinL. I.SchoolerC. (1978). The structure of coping. Journal of Health and social behavior, 9(1), 2–21. Retrieved fromhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/2136319.
45.
RaykovT. (1997). Scale reliability, Cronbach's coefficient alpha, and violations of essential tau-equivalence with fixed congeneric components. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 33, 343–363.
46.
ReiseS. P.WidamanK. F.PughR. H. (1993). Confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory: two approaches for exploring measurement invariance. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 552–566.
47.
RigdonE. E. (1998). Structural equation modeling. In MarcoulidesG. A. (Ed.), Modern methods for business research (pp. 251–294). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
48.
RubinA.BabbieE. (2011). Research methods for social work (7th ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson Brooks/Cole.
49.
SchaferJ. L.GrahamJ. W. (2002). Missing data: Our view of the state of the art. Psychological Methods, 7, 147–177.
50.
SchaferJ. L.OlsenM. K. (1998). Multiple imputation for multivariate missing-data problems: A data analyst's perspective. Multivariate Behavioral Research. Special Issue: Innovative Methods for Prevention Research, 33, 545–571.
51.
SherradenM. (1991). Assets and the poor: A new American welfare policy. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe, Inc.
52.
SteigerJ. (1990). Structural model evaluation and modification: An interval estimation approach. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 173–180.
53.
WidamanK. F.ReiseS. P. (1997). Exploring the measurement invariance of psychological instruments: Applications in the substance use domain. In BryantK. J.WindleM.S. G.West (Eds.), The science of prevention: Methodological advances from alcohol and substance abuse research (pp. 281–324). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
54.
WuW.LangK. M.LittleT. D. (2009). Does it fit? A simple method of assessing model fit and testing significance in multiply imputed data. Paper presented at the Society for Multivariate Experimental Psychology, Shalishan, Oregon.
