| Date: | Thu, 3 Jun 2004 09:36:34 -0400 |
|---|
| Reply-To: | Mark Davenport <madavenp@OFFICE.UNCG.EDU> |
|---|
| Sender: | "SPSSX(r) Discussion" <SPSSX-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU> |
|---|
| From: | Mark Davenport <madavenp@OFFICE.UNCG.EDU> |
|---|
| Subject: | Re: report of factor analysis |
|---|
|
| Content-Type: | text/plain; charset=US-ASCII |
|---|
Apparently you did an oblique rotation. Factor pattern values are the same as standardized regression weights (weight of variable on factor after other variables are partialled out), the structure values are the factor loadings. It would be advantagous to review both matrices.
If I may ask, why did you choose ML? Are you doing a confirmatory study? If so, Thompson regards the structure matrix as most important in a CFA model.
Mark
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Mark A. Davenport Ph.D.
Office of Student Affairs Research and Evaluation
The University of North Carolina at Greensboro
149 Mossman Bldg.
Greensboro, NC 27402-6170
336.334.5099
madavenp@office.uncg.edu
'An approximate answer to the right problem is worth a good deal more than an exact
answer to an approximate problem' -- J. W. Tukey
| 
