Structural Equation Modeling

I. Introduction
a. Things you should know before attempting SEM
b. Kinds of research questions addressed by SEM
c. Limitations and assumptions relating to SEM
d. reparing your data for analysis
II. !e"eloping the Model #ypothesis and Model Speci$cation
a. !rawing your hypothesi%ed model& procedures and notation
b. Specifying equation sets
c. Specifying co"ariances' residuals' and "ariances
d. Estimating' $(ing' and constraining "ariables
i. Estimation methods
ii. !etermining the number of data points for testing
e. )"eridenti$cation
f. reparing a program to analy%e your model
g. )ther issues
III. *ssessing Model +it
a. ,omparati"e $t indices
b. -ariance.accounting indices
c. arameter.based indices
I-. Model Modi$cation
a. Modifying a model to impro"e $t
b. The ,hi.square di/erence test
c. The Lagrange.multiplier test
d. The 0ald test
-. E(amples
Introduction
A. Things You Should Know Before Using Structural Equation Modeling.
Structural equation modeling 1SEM2 is a series of statistical methods that
allow comple( relationships between one or more independent "ariables and one
or more dependent "ariables. Though there are many ways to describe SEM' it
is most commonly thought of as a hybrid between some form of analysis of
"ariance 1*3)-*24regression and some form of factor analysis. In general' it
can be remarked that SEM allows one to perform some type of multile"el
regression4*3)-* on factors. 5ou should therefore be quite familiar with
uni"ariate and multi"ariate regression4*3)-* as well as the basics of factor
analysis to implement SEM for your data.
Some preliminary terminology will also be useful. The following
de$nitions regarding the types of "ariables that occur in SEM allow for a more
clear e(planation of the procedure&
a. -ariables that are not in6uenced by another other "ariables in a
model are called exogenous "ariables. *s an e(ample' suppose we
ha"e two factors that cause changes in 7*' hours studying per
week and I8. Suppose there is no causal relationship between
hours studying and I8. Then both I8 and hours studying would be
e(ogenous "ariables in the model.
b. -ariables that are in6uenced by other "ariables in a model are
called endogenous "ariables. 7* would be a endogenous
"ariable in the pre"ious e(ample in 1a2.
c. * "ariable that is directly obser"ed and measured is called a
manifest "ariable 1it is also called an indicator "ariable in some
circles2. In the e(ample in 1a2' all "ariables can be directly
obser"ed and thus qualify as manifest "ariables. There is a special
name for a structural equation model which e(amines only
manifest "ariables' called path analysis.
d. * "ariable that is not directly measured is a latent "ariable. The
9factors: in a factor analysis are latent "ariables. +or e(ample'
suppose we were additionally interested in the impact of
moti"ation on 7*. Moti"ation' as it is an internal' non.obser"able
state' is indirectly assessed by a student;s response on a
questionnaire' and thus it is a latent "ariable. Latent "ariables
increase the comple(ity of a structural equation model because one
needs to take into account all of the questionnaire items and
measured responses that are used to quantify the 9factor: or latent
"ariable. In this instance' each item on the questionnaire would be
a single "ariable that would either be signi$cantly or insigni$cantly
in"ol"ed in a linear combination of "ariables that in6uence the
"ariation in the latent factor of moti"ation
e. +or the purposes of SEM' speci$cally' moderation refers to a
situation that includes three or more "ariables' such that the
presence of one of those "ariables changes the relationship
between the other two. In other words' moderation e(ists when
the association between two "ariables is not the same at all le"els
of a third "ariable. )ne way to think of moderation is when you
obser"e an interaction between two "ariables in an *3)-*. +or
e(ample' stress and psychological ad<ustment may di/er at
di/erent le"els of social support 1i.e.' this is the de$nition of an
interaction2. In other words' stress may ad"ersely a/ect ad<ustment
more under conditions of low social support compared to
conditions of high social support. This would imply a two.way
interaction between stress and psychological support if an *3)-*
were to be performed. +igure = shows a conceptual diagram of
moderation. This diagram shows that there are three direct e/ects
that are hypothesi%ed to cause changes in psychological
ad<ustment > a main e/ect of stress' a main e/ect of social support'
and an interaction e/ect of stress and social support.
igure !. A "iagrammed E#ample of Moderation. $ote that each indi%idual
e&ect of stress' social support' and the interaction of stress and social support
can (e separated and is said to (e related to psychological ad)ustment. Also
note that there are no causal connections (etween stress and social support.
f. +or the purposes of SEM' speci$cally' mediation refers to a
situation that includes three or more "ariables' such that there is a
causal process between all three "ariables. 3ote that this is
distinct from moderation. In the pre"ious e(ample in 1e2' we can
say there are three separate things in the model that cause a
change in psychological ad<ustment& stress' social support' and the
combined e/ect of stress and social support that is not accounted
for by each indi"idual "ariable. Mediation describes a much
di/erent relationship that is generally more comple(. In a
Stress
Social
Support
Stress ?
Social
Support
Interaction
sychological
*d<ustment
mediation relationship' there is a direct e&ect between an
independent "ariable and a dependent "ariable. There are also
indirect e&ects between an independent "ariable and a mediator
"ariable' and between a mediator "ariable and a dependent
"ariable. The e(ample in 1e2 abo"e can be re.speci$ed into a
mediating process' as shown in +igure @ below. The main
di/erence from the moderation model is that we now allow for
causal relationships between stress and social support and social
support and psychological ad<ustment to be e(pressed. Imagine
that social support was not included in the model > we <ust wanted
to see the direct e/ect of stress and psychological ad<ustment. 0e
would get a measure of the direct e/ect by using regression or
*3)-*. 0hen we include social support as a mediator' that direct
e/ect will change as a result of decomposing the causal process
into indirect e/ects of stress on social support and social support
on psychological ad<ustment. The degree to which the direct e/ect
changes as a result of including the mediating "ariable of social
support is referred to as the mediational e&ect. Testing for
mediation in"ol"es running a series of regression analyses for all of
the causal pathways and some method of estimating a change in
direct e/ect. This technique is actually in"ol"ed in structural
equation models that include mediator "ariables and will be
discussed in the ne(t section of this document.
igure *. A "iagram of a Mediation Model. +ncluding indirect e&ects in a
mediation model may change the direct e&ect of a single independent
%aria(le on a dependent %aria(le.
In many respects moderation and mediational models are the
foundation of structural equation modeling. In fact' they can
be considered as simple structural equation models themsel"es.
Therefore' it is "ery important to understand how to analy%e such
models to understand more comple( structural equation models
that include latent "ariables. 7enerally' a mediation model like the
one abo"e can be implemented by doing a series of separate
regressions. *s described in latter sections of this document' the
e/ects in a moderational model can be numerically described by
Stress sychologic
al
*d<ustment
Social
Support
,-e%ised.
"irect E&ect
+ndirect
E&ect
+ndirect
E&ect
using path coe&icients' which are identical or similar to regression
coe/icients' depending on the speci$c choice of analysis you are
performing.
g. Covariance and correlation are the building blocks of how your
data will be represented when doing any programming or model
speci$cation within a software program that implements structural
equation modeling. 5ou should know how to obtain a correlation
matri( or co"ariance matri( using A), ,)AA in S*S' or use other
menu tools from a statistical package of your choice' to specify that
a correlation or co"ariance matri( be calculated. The co"ariance
matri( in practice ser"es as your dataset to be analy%ed. In the
conte(t of SEM' co"ariances and correlations between "ariables
are essential because they allow you to include a relationship
between two "ariables that is not necessarily causal. In practice'
most structural equation models contain both causal and non.
causal relationships. )btaining co"ariance estimates between
"ariables allows one to better estimate direct and indirect e/ects
with other "ariables' particularly in comple( models with many
parameters to be estimated.
h. * structural model is a part of the entire structural equation
model diagram that you will complete for e"ery model you propose.
It is used to relate all of the "ariables 1both latent and manifest2
you will need to account for in the model. There are a few
important rules to follow when creating a structural model and
they will be discussed in the second section of this document.
i. * measurement model is a part of the entire structural equation
model diagram that you will complete for e"ery model you propose.
It is essential if you ha"e latent "ariables in your model. This part
of the diagram which is analogous to factor analysis& 5ou need to
include all indi"idual items' "ariables' or obser"ations that 9load:
onto the latent "ariable' their relationships' "ariances' and errors.
There are a few important rules to follow when creating the
measurement model and they will be discussed in the second
section of this document.
<. Together' the structural model and the measurement model form
the entire structural equation model. This model includes
e"erything that has been measured' obser"ed' or otherwise
manipulated in the set of "ariables e(amined.
k. * recursive structural equation model is a model in which
causation is directed in one single direction. * nonrecursive
structural equation model has causation which 6ows in both
directions at some parts of the model.
B. Types of -esearch /uestions Answered (y SEM.
SEM can conceptually be used to answer any research question in"ol"ing
the indirect or direct obser"ation of one or more independent "ariables or one or
more dependent "ariables. #owe"er' the primary goal of SEM is to determine
and "alidify a proposed causal process and4or model. Therefore' SEM is a
con$rmatory technique. Like any other test or model' we ha"e a sample and
want to say something about the population that comprises the sample. 0e ha"e
a co"ariance matri( to ser"e as our dataset' which is based on the sample of
collected measurements. The empirical question of SEM is therefore whether
the proposed model produces a population co"ariance matri( that is consistent
with the sample co"ariance matri(. Because one must specify a priori a model
that will undergo "alidation testing' there are many questions SEM can answer.
SEM can tell you how if your model is adequate or not. arameters are
estimated and compared with the sample co"ariance matri(. 7oodness of $t
statistics can be calculated that will tell you whether your model is appropriate
or needs further re"ision. SEM can also be used to compare multiple theories
that are speci$ed a priori.
SEM can tell you the amount of "ariance in the dependent "ariables 1!-s2
> both manifest and latent !-s > is accounted for by the I-s. It can also tell you
the reliability of each measured "ariables. *nd' as pre"iously mentioned' SEM
allows you to e(amine mediation and moderation' which can include indirect
e/ects.
SEM can also tell you about group di/erences. 5ou can $t separate
structural equation models for di/erent groups and compare results. In
addition' you can include both random and $(ed e/ects in your models and thus
include hierarchical modeling techniques in your analyses.
0. 1imitations and Assumptions -egarding SEM.
Because SEM is a con$rmatory technique' you must plan accordingly. 5ou
must specify a full model a priori and test that model based on the sample and
"ariables included in your measurements. 5ou must know the number of
parameters you need to estimate > including co"ariances' path coe/icients' and
"ariances. 5ou must know all relationships you want to specify in the model.
Then' and only then' can you begin your analyses.
Because SEM has the ability to model comple( relationships between
multi"ariate data' sample si%e is an important 1but unfortunately
underemphasi%ed2 issue. Two popular assumptions are that you need more than
@CC obser"ations' or at least DC more than E times the number of "ariables in the
model. * larger sample si%e is always desired for SEM.
Like other multi"ariate statistical methodologies' most of the estimation
techniques used in SEM require multi"ariate normality. 5our data need to be
e(amined for uni"ariate and multi"ariate outliers. Transformations on the
"ariables can be made. #owe"er' there are some estimation methods that do not
require normality.
SEM techniques only look at $rst.order 1linear2 relationships between
"ariables. Linear relationships can be e(plored by creating bi"ariate
scatterplots for all of your "ariables. ower transformations can be made if a
relationship between two "ariables seems quadratic.
Multicollinearity among the I-s for manifest "ariables can be an issue.
Most programs will inspect the determinant of a section of your co"ariance
matri(' or the whole co"ariance matri(. * "ery small determinant may be
indicati"e of e(treme multicollinearity.
The residuals of the co"ariances 1not residual scores2 need to be small and
centered about %ero. Some goodness of $t tests 1like the Lagrange Multiplier
test2 remain robust against highly de"iated residuals or non.normal residuals.
". 2reparing Your "ata for Analysis.
*ssuming you ha"e checked for model assumptions' dealt with missing data' and
imported your data into a software package' you should obtain a co"ariance
matri( on your dataset. In S*S' you can run A), ,)AA and create an output
$le that has the co"ariance matri(. *lternati"ely you can manually type in the
co"ariance matri( or import it from a spreadsheet. 5ou must specify in the data
declaration that the set is a co"ariance matri(' so' in S*S for e(ample' your code
would appear as data name type=COVF e/ort must be made to ensure the
decimals of the entries are aligned. )ther programs like E8S or LISAEL can
handle full datasets and will automatically compute co"ariance matrices for you.
!e"eloping the Model #ypothesis and Model Speci$cation
)ften' the most di/icult part of SEM is correctly identifying your model.
5ou must know e(actly the number of latent and manifest "ariables you are
including in your model' as well as the number of "ariances and co"ariances to
be calculated' as well as the number of parameters you are estimating. This
section details the rules and con"entions that are used when specifying a model.
*t this time it does not co"er a complete set of rules for each popular software
programs that are a"ailable 1E8S' LISAEL' *M)S' and A), ,*LIS in S*S2. In
general' though' the con"entions that follow are generally compatible with the
e(isting software programs.
A. "rawing your hypothesi3ed model4 procedures and notation.
The most important part of SEM analysis is the causal model you are
required to draw before attempting an analysis. The following basic' general
rules are used when drawing a model&
-ule !. Latent "ariables4factors are represented with circles and
measured4manifest "ariables are represented with squares.
-ule *. Lines with an arrow in one direction show a hypothesi%ed direct
relationship between the two "ariables. It should originate at the causal "ariable
and point to the "ariable that is caused. *bsence of a line indicates there is no
causal relationship between the "ariables.
-ule 5. Lines with an arrow in both directions should be cur"ed and this
demonstrates a bi.directional relationship 1i.e.' a co"ariance2.
-ule 5a. ,o"ariance arrows should only be allowed for e(ogenous
"ariables.
-ule 6. +or e"ery endogenous "ariable' a residual term should be added in
the model. 7enerally' a residual term is a circle with the letter E written in it'
which stands for error.
-ule 6a. +or latent "ariables that are also endogenous' a residual
term is not called error in the lingo of SEM. It is called a disturbance' and
therefore the 9error term: here would be a circle with a ! written in it' standing
for disturbance.
These rules need to be expanded and completed. An example diagram
(that is analyed later on! is included on the next page.
SEM e(ample form *M)S&
The model is built in *M)S and the diagram is shown below' please see the S*S
e(ample for the e(planation on the "ariables. The standardi%ed parameter
estimates are shown in the graph. The squares represent the obser"ed "ariables
and the circles are for the error terms. Three latent "ariables are assumed with
G con$rmatory factor analyses used to deri"e them. )"als are used to indicate
these latent "ariables. The correlation structure between error terms of the
con$rmatory factor analysis are suggested by *M)S after the initial model
$tting without any correlated error terms. This helps impro"e the o"erall model
$tting.
The goodness.of.$t test statistics are displayed below. lease note the ,hi.square
test statistic is not signi$cant at C.CD' which suggest that the model $tting is
only acceptable. Aoot mean square error of appro(imation 1AMSE*2 is C.CG@C@
and since it is less than C.CD' it indicates a good $t. 7oodness of +it Inde( 17+I2
and *d<usted 7oodness of +it Inde( 1*7+I2 are larger than C.H which again
re6ect a good $t although 7+I and *7+I may not be as informati"e as ,hi.square
test statistics and AMSE*.
"esult (#efault model!
Minimum was achie"ed
,hi.square I J.E=J@K
!egrees of freedom I K
robability le"el 1p."alue2 I .CHED=
"$%&A
Model AMSE* L) HC #I HC ,L)SE
!efault model .CG@C@ .CCCCC .CLDG@ .JE@C@
Independence
model
.GHCJ@ .GJLEJ .KCKJD .CCCC=
"$"' ()*
Model AMA 7+I *7+I 7+I
!efault model .CECD@ .HHJ@K .HEDDG .=EHHD
Saturated
model
.CCCCC =.CCCCC
Independence
model
G.HEDHC .KE@=L .@JDCG .GKKKC
"egression +eights, ((roup number - . #efault model!
Estimate S.E. ,.A. Label
*lienation=HL
J
M... SES ..LKKHD
.
CDGDC
.
=@.CDK
=E
NN
N
*lienation=HJ
=
M... SES ..@@KHJ
.
CDDCH
.
K.CEGH
C
NN
N
*lienation=HJ
=
M...
*lienation=
HLJ
.DEH=L
.
CDDEC
=C.DDE
==
NN
N
Educ M... SES =.CCCCC
SEI M... SES .DEKCH
.
CK@LK
=G.LHJ
LC
NN
N
owlesLJ M...
*lienation=
HLJ
=.CCCCC
*nomiaLJ M...
*lienation=
HLJ
=.=@DJD
.
CLJJ@
=L.L@K
@@
NN
N
Estimate S.E. ,.A. Label
owlesJ= M...
*lienation=
HJ=
=.CCCCC
*nomiaJ= M...
*lienation=
HJ=
=.=GGG@
.
CJ===
=D.HGE
=L
NN
N
Covariances, ((roup number - . #efault model!
Estimate S.E. ,.A. Label
eG
M..
O
eD =.L=CJK
.
G@JCG
K.H@DK
=
NNN
eK
M..
O
eL .DGCHC
.
@KED=
@.=GLG
K
.
CG@L
D
*ll the parameter estimates are high signi$cant. In other words' all of them are
signi$cantly di/erently from C. The interpretations on the parameter estimates
are straight forward. +or e(ample' *lienation in =HLJ decreases ..J@L for each
=.CC increase in SES. The correlation structure between eG and eD' eK and eL is
also estimated by *M)S with signi$cant results.
%tandardied "egression +eights, ((roup number - . #efault model!
Estimate
*lienation=
HLJ
M... SES ..L@JHD
*lienation=
HJ=
M... SES ..@=KEH
*lienation=
HJ=
M...
*lienation=
HLJ
.DJJHJ
Educ M... SES .JEHCE
SEI M... SES .LJELD
owlesLJ M...
*lienation=
HLJ
.E@GJH
*nomiaLJ M...
*lienation=
HLJ
.JEDGD
owlesJ= M...
*lienation=
HJ=
.ECDHC
*nomiaJ= M...
*lienation=
HJ=
.E=DC@
The standardi%ed the regression estimates are comparable' which may assist us
to pick up more important factors and relationships.
/. %&$ &xamples in %A%
0heaton' Muthen' *lwin' and Summers 1=HJJ2 has ser"ed to illustrate the
performed of se"eral implementations for the analysis of structural equation
models. #ere two di/erent models will be analy%ed by S*S. The database has
three continuous predictor "ariables& education le"el' a socioeconomic indicator'
and feelings of powerlessness measured in =HLJ. There is one continuous
dependent "ariable' feelings of powerless measured in =HJ=. The data used here
is a simulated "ersion distributed by
http&44www.ute(as.edu4its4rc4tutorials4stat4amos4.
(-! A 0ath Analysis &xample
The data were reanaly%ed with A), ,*LIS. Input data was data itself. *
correlation or co"ariance matri( can be an input data. The path diagram'
including unstandardi%ed regression coe/icients' appears the below.
)igure -. 0ath Analysis 1 +heaton #ata
i2 ath *nalysis Model
PROC CALIS data=Wheaton1 ucov aug;
Lineqs
Powles71 = b0 Intercept + b1 Educ + b !EI + b" Powles#7+ error;
!td error = ve;
run;
A), ,*LIS neglects the intercept parameter by default. To estimate the
intercept' change the ,)- option to P3,)-' which analy%es uncorrelated
co"ariance matri(' and use the *P7 option' which adds a row and column for the
intercept' called I3TEA,E' to the matri( being analy%ed. The ,)- option in the
A), ,*LIS statement requests the analysis of the co"ariance matri(. 0ithout
the ,)- option' the correlation matri( would be computed and analy%ed. 5ou
can gi"e an option by MET#)! I option' ma(imum likelihood is the default.
ii2 Aesults
$he %&LI! Procedure
'it 'unction 0(0000
)oodness o* 'it Inde+ ,)'I- 1(0000
%hi.!quare 0(0000
%hi.!quare /' 0
Pr 0 %hi.!quare 1(0001
23!E& Esti4ate 0(0000
5entler6s %o4parative 'it Inde+ 1(0000
3ani*est 7ariable Equations with Esti4ates
Powles71 = 0(89:#;Powles#7 + .0(119;Educ + .0(1:8<;!EI +
#(11:;Intercept
!td Err 0(0"18 b" 0(0"8# b1 0(08<: b 1(0188
b0
t 7alue 18(#""< ."(87# ."(:<#8 #(0#"
+ 1(0000 error
7ariances o* E+ogenous 7ariables
!tandard
7ariable Para4eter Esti4ate Error t 7alue
Powles#7 1<(7788
Educ 1<(#7<8
!EI 89(8#917
Intercept 1(00107
error ve #(<#78" 0("1<"0 1(9<
The path analysis showed some interesting results in terms of model $t& ,hi.
square I C.CCC' df I C' p M C.CCC= and ,+I 1Bentler;s ,omparati"e +it Inde(2 I
=.CCC and AMSE* I C.CCC.
Table -. 2nstandardied 0arameter &stimates 1 0ath Analysis
aramet
er
-ariable Estimate Standard
Error
t."alue
,oe/icie
nt
Education
owlesJ=
.C.==@D C.CGKL .G.@KJL
SEI owlesJ= .C.=HKE C.CKEH .G.HELK
owlesLJ
owlesJ=
C.KDHL C.CG=K =K.LGGE
-ariance
"e owlesJ= >
une(plained
L.ELJKG C.G=EGC @=.DE
"ariance
If input data is in the form of a correlation matri(' standardi%ed and
unstandardi%ed parameter estimates will be equal. 3ote& The A), AE7 and
A), ,)AA can be used to $t this simple model.
(3! %A% Code for %tructural &quation $odel 4ith 5atent variables
The data were reanaly%ed with A), ,*LIS. Input data was data itself. *
correlation or co"ariance matri( can be an input data. Suppose you want to $t
the following diagram in order to test a model of the stability of alienation o"er
time' as measured by anomia and powerlessness feelings at two measurement
occasions' =HLJ and =HJ=' as well as education le"el and a socioeconomic inde(.
)igure 3. %tructural &quation $odel 4ith 5atent Variables 1 +heaton
#ata
i2 ath *nalysis Model
#ere += is Q*lienation =HLJ'; +@ is Q*lienation =HJ='; and +G is QSES.; The names
of the latent "ariables must start with the pre$( letter + 1for +actor2F the names
of the residuals must start with the pre$( letters E 1for Error2 or ! 1for
!isturbance2.
PROC CALIS cov data=Wheaton1 4ethod=4l;
Lineqs
Educ = '" + e1=
!EI = a '" + e=
&no4ia#7 = '1 + e"=
Powles#7 = a8 '1 + e8=
&no4ia71 = ' + e9=
Powles71 = a# ' + e#=
'1 = c1 '" + d1=
' = c '1 + c" '" + d;
!td
e1.e# = $he1.$he#=
d1.d = Psi1.Psi=
'" = E*";
%ov
e" e9 = $he7=
e8 e# = $he<;
7ar Educ !EI &no4ia#7 Powles#7 &no4ia71 Powles71;
RUN;
ii2 Aesults
The model pro"ided acceptable $t for ,+I 1C.HHE@ O C.H2 and AMSE* 1C.CG@C M
C.CL2. *ll parameter estimates were signi$cant at the C.C= le"el 1% O @.DL2. The
p."alue of ,hi.square "alue 1C.CHED O C.CD2 is okay.
$he %&LI! Procedure
'it 'unction 0(00<8
)oodness o* 'it Inde+ ,)'I- 0(::7
)'I &d>usted *or /egrees o* 'reedo4 ,&)'I- 0(:<99
%hi.!quare 7(<17
%hi.!quare /' 8
Pr 0 %hi.!quare 0(0:<9
23!E& Esti4ate 0(0"0
5entler6s %o4parative 'it Inde+ 0(::<
5entler ? 5onett6s ,1:<0- @on.nor4ed Inde+ 0(::""
5entler ? 5onett6s ,1:<0- @'I 0(::#8
Aa4es= 3ulaiB= ? 5rett ,1:<- Parsi4onious @'I 0(#97
C.$est o* Wilson ? Dil*ertE ,1:"1- 1(:78
5ollen ,1:<#- @or4ed Inde+ 2ho1 0(:<#"
5ollen ,1:<<- @on.nor4ed Inde+ /elta 0(::<
3ani*est 7ariable Equations with !tandardiFed Esti4ates
Educ = 0(7<:1 '" + 0(#18" e1
!EI = 0(#7<#;'" + 0(7"89 e
a
&no4ia#7 = 0(7<9" '1 + 0(#1:1 e"
Powles#7 = 0(<"<;'1 + 0(9##: e8
a8
&no4ia71 = 0(<190 ' + 0(97:8 e9
Powles71 = 0(<09:;' + 0(9:1 e#
a#
Latent 7ariable Equations with !tandardiFed Esti4ates
'1 = .0(#<0;'" + 0(77<" d1
c1
' = 0(97<0;'1 + .0(18:;'" + 0(#<10 d
c c"

7ariances o* E+ogenous 7ariables
!tandard
7ariable Para4eter Esti4ate Error t 7alue
Powles#7 1<(7788
Educ 1<(#7<8
!EI 89(8#917
Intercept 1(00107
error ve #(<#78" 0("1<"0 1(9<
%orrelations &4ong E+ogenous 7ariables
7ar1 7ar Para4eter Esti4ate
e" e9 $he7 0("9<8
e8 e# $he< 0(1#887
Table 3. 2nstandardied 0arameter &stimates 1 %tructural &quation
$odel 4ith 5atent variables
aramet
er
-ariable Estimat
e
Standard
Error
t."alue
,oe/icie
nt
SES Education =.CCCC
SES SEI C.DEK= C.CK@L =G.LHJD
*lienationLJ
*nomiaLJ
=.CCCC
*lienationLJ
owlesLJ
C.EEEG C.CDGK =L.L@K@
*lienationJ=
*nomiaJ=
=.CCCC
*lienationJ=
owlesJ=
C.EE@K C.CDDK =D.HGE=
-ariance
E= G.LC@K= C.K=H=L E.DH
E@ @.GJD@C C.=J=@K =G.EJ
EG K.HGJKE C.KJJ@C =C.GD
EK @.HLHGK C.GL=JK E.@=
ED K.@@HEJ C.DCE@G E.G@
EL G.D=LK@ C.KCLGK E.LD
!= K.E=@HH C.KHC@C H.E@
!@ G.EE==L C.GHKHH H.EG
+G D.HKK@E C.DL=EH =C.DE
,o"arian
ce
EG . ED =.L=@KH C.G@JGE K.HG
EK > EL C.DG=KD C.@KEJE @.=K
"eference
S*S4ST*T Pser;s 7uide -ersion E