The use of structural equation modeling (SEM), a second-generation multivariate analysis technique that determines the degree to which a theoretical model is supported by the sample data, is becoming increasingly popular in counseling research. SEM tests models that include both observed and latent variables, allowing the counseling researcher to confirm the factor structure of a newly developed or existing psychological instruments and to examine the plausibility of complex, theoretical counseling models. This article provides counseling researchers and practitioners with an overview of SEM and presents five steps for conducting SEM analysis in counseling research.
AndersonJ. C.GerbingD. W. (1984). The effect of sampling error on convergence, improper solutions, and goodness-of-fit indices for maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analysis. Psychametrika, 49, 155–173.
2.
AndersonJ. C.GerbingD. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 411–423.
BangertA. W.BaumbergerJ. P. (2005). Research and statistical techniques used in the journal of counseling and development: 1990-2001. Journal of Counseling and Development, 83, 480–487.
5.
BaronR. M.KennyD. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173
6.
BentlerP. M. (1989). EQS: A structural equations program manual. Los Angeles, CA: BMDP Statistical Software.
7.
BentlerP. M.ChouC. (1987). Practical issues in structural equation modeling. Sociological Methods and Research, 16, 78–117.
8.
BollenK. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York, NY: John Wiley.
9.
BollenK. A.LongJ. S. (1993). Testing structural equation models. Beverley Hills, CA: Sage.
10.
Bullock-YowellE.PetersonG. W.ReardonR. C.LeirerS. J.ReedC. A. (2011). Relationships among career and life stress, negative career thoughts, and career decision state: A cognitive information processing perspective. Career Development Quarterly, 59, 302–314.
11.
ChanF.LeeG. K.LeeE. J.KubotaC.AllenC. A. (2007). Structural equation modeling in rehabilitation counseling research. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 51, 53–66.
12.
ChaoR.Chu-LienN.SanjayR. (2011). The role of ethnic identity, gender roles, and multicultural training in college counselors' multicultural counseling competence: A mediation model. Journal of College Counseling, 14, 50–64.
13.
CochranD. B.WangE. W.StevensonS. J.JohnsonL. E.CrewsC. (2010). Adolescent occupational aspirations: Test of Gottfredson’s theory of circumscription and compromise. Career Development Quarterly, 59, 412–427.
14.
CooleyW. W. (1978). Explanatory observational studies. Educational Researcher, 7, 9–15.
15.
CostelloA. B.OsborneJ. (2005). Best practices in factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment Research & Evaluation, 10, 1–9.
16.
CrockettS. A. (2011). The role of supervisor-supervisee cultural differences, supervisor multicultural competence, and the supervisory working alliance in supervision outcomes: A moderated mediation model (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database (UMI No. 3455280).
17.
HensonR.HullD.WilliamsC. (2010). Methodology in our education research culture: Toward a stronger collective quantitative proficiency. Educational Researcher, 39, 229–240. doi: 10.2102/0013189X10365102
18.
HoelterJ. W. (1983). The analysis of covariance structures: Goodness-of-fit indices. Sociological Methods and Research, 11, 325–344.
19.
HorvathA. O.GreenbergL. S. (1986). The development of the working alliance inventory. In GreenbergL. S.PinsofW. M. (Eds.), The psychotherapeutic process: A research handbook (pp. 529–556). New York, NY: Gilford.
20.
JamesL. R.MulaikS. A.BrettJ. M. (1982). Causal analysis: Assumptions, models, and data. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
KaplanD. M.GladdingS. T. (2011). A vision for the future of counseling: The 20/20 principles for unifying and strengthening the profession. Journal of Counseling and Development, 89, 367–372.
23.
KellowayE. K. (1998). Using liseral for structural equation modeling: A researcher’s guide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
24.
KlineR. B. (2010). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford.
25.
LadanyN.MoriY.MehrK. E. (2007). Trainee perceptions of effective and ineffective supervision interventions (Unpublished manuscript). Bethlehem, PA: Lehigh University.
26.
LarsonL. M.SuzukiL. A.GillespieK. N.PotenzaM. T.BechtelM. A.ToulouseA. L. (1992). Development and validation of the counseling self-estimate inventory. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 39, 105–130.
27.
LentR. W.LopezF. G.BrownS. D.GoreP. A. (1996). Latent structure of the sources of mathematics self-efficacy. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 49, 292–308.
28.
LundervoldD. A.BelwoodM. F. (2000). The best kept secret in counseling: Single case (N = 1) experimental designs. Journal of Counseling and Development, 78, 92–102.
29.
MacCallumR. C.BrowneM. W.SugawaraH. M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1, 130–149.
30.
MarshH. W.BallaJ. R.McDonaldR. P. (1988). Goodness-of-fit indexes in confirmatory factor analysis: The effect of sample size. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 391–410.
31.
MartensM. P. (2005). The use of structural equation modeling in counseling psychology research. The Counseling Psychologist, 33, 269–298. doi: 10.1177/0011000004272260
32.
MeyerL. S.GamstG.GuarinoA. J. (2006). Applied multivariate research: Design and interpretation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
33.
MuellerR. O. (1996). Basic principles of structural equation modeling: An introduction to LISREL and EQS. New York, NY: Springer.
34.
MulaikS. A.JamesL. R.Van AlstineJ.BennettN.LindiS.StilwellC. D. (1989). Evaluation of goodness-of-fit indices for structural equation models. Psychology Bulletin, 105, 430–445. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.105.3.430
35.
O’BrianR. M. (1994). Identification of simple measurement models with multiple latent variables and correlated errors. In MarsdenP. V. (Ed.), Sociological methodology (pp. 137–170). Oxford, England: Blackwell.
36.
QuintanaS. M.MaxwellS. E. (1999). Implications of recent development in structural equation modeling for counseling psychology. The Counseling Psychologist, 27, 485–527. doi: 10.1177/0011000099274002
37.
RayD. C.HullD. M.ThackerA. J.PaceL. S.SwanK. L.CarlsonS. E.SullivanJ. M. (2011). Research in counseling: A 10-year review to inform practice. Journal of Counseling and Development, 89, 349–359.
38.
RaykovT.MarcoulidesG. A. (2000). A first course in structural equation modeling. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
39.
RaykovT.WidamanK. F. (1995). Issues in applied structural equation modeling research. Structural Equation Modeling, 2, 289–318. doi: 10.1080/10705519509540017
40.
SarisW. E.SatorraA. (1993). Power evaluations in structural equation models. In BollenK. A.LongJ. S. (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 181–204). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
41.
SchumackerR. E.LomaxR. G. (2010). A beginner's guide to structural equation modeling (3rded.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
42.
SkosirevaA. K. (2010). Acculturation, alientation, and HIV risk among the Russian-speaking drug users in Estonia (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3402554).
43.
StageF. K.CarterH. C.NoraA. (2004). Path analysis: An introduction and analysis of a decade of research. Journal of Educational Research, 98, 5–12.
44.
SteigerJ. H. (1990). Structural model evaluation and modification: An interval estimation approach. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 173–180.
45.
StrickerG. (2002). What is a scientist-practitioner anyway?Journal of Clinical Psychology, 58, 1277–1283. doi: 10.1002/jclp.10111
46.
TomarkenA. J.WallerN. G. (2005). Structural equation modeling: Strengths, limitations, and misconceptions. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 1, 31–65.
47.
TovarE.SimonM. (2010). Factorial structure and invariance analysis of the Sense of Belonging Scales. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 43, 199–128.
48.
VillodasF.VillodasM. T.RoeschS. (2011). Examining the factor structure of the positive and negative affect schedule (PANAS) in a multiethnic sample of adolescents. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 44, 193–203. doi:10.1177/0748175611414721
