Keywords
How to Cite
Abstract
Although the performance of an exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis on the same data set is largely rejected, its partitioning is recommended to obtain a cross-validation. This is not very understandable, since the same criticism that can be made to the application of the first method is valid for the second, since the only differences that could be detected are those that arise from the randomization process in the division of the sample. A cross validation requires independent samples, not the same sample divided into two parts.
References
Fokkema, M. y Greiff, S. (2017). How Performing PCA and CFA on the Same Data Equals Trouble. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 33(6), 399-402. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000460
Goretzko, D., Pham, T. T. H. y Bühner, M. (2019). Exploratory factor analysis: Current use, methodological developments and recommendations for good practice. Current Psychology, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-019-00300-2
Lloret-Segura, S., Ferreres-Traver, A., Hernández-Baeza, A. y Tomás-Marco, I. (2014). El análisis factorial exploratorio de los ítems: una guía práctica, revisada y actualizada. Anales de Psicología/Annals of Psychology, 30(3), 1151-1169. https://doi.org/10.6018/analesps.30.3.199361
Morgado, F. F., Meireles, J. F., Neves, C. M., Amaral, A. y Ferreira, M. E. (2017). Scale development: ten main limitations and recommendations to improve future research practices. Psicologia: Reflexão e Crítica, 30, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41155-016-0057-1
Schmitt, T. A., Sass, D. A., Chappelle, W., y Thompson, W. (2018). Selecting the “best” factor structure and moving measurement validation forward: An illustration. Journal of Personality Assessment, 100(4), 345-362. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2018.1449116
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2021 R.E.M.A. Revista electrónica de metodología aplicada