4 views

Uploaded by Zeinm Khen

University Assignment few years ago

- The Implementation of World Class Manufacturing Techniques in Egyptian Manufacturing Firms an Empirical Study
- Attachment and Self-evaluation in Chinese Adolescents
- 3620 Lecture 07
- Project Management Journal Volume 38 Issue 4 2007 [Doi 10.1002_pmj.20014]
- Individual Differences in Uses of Humor and Their Relation to Psychological Being- Development of the Humor Styles Questionnaire
- exercise poster wpa
- Consumer Perception of Mobile Phone Attributes
- Gabriel
- Molino Monica Tesi PhD
- Imran Methodology
- 1184-3567-1-PB (1)
- Para Map
- Measuring Adult Attachment
- Chapter5_3 - Copy
- 18_EIJMMS_VOL1_ISSUE3
- Effect of TQM Practices on Quality Performance through Operating Performance – An Empirical Study
- Chandler et al_Causation and effectuation processes.pdf
- Mathematics Learning Performance and Mathematics
- 02 HSQ Article Martin Et Al (1)
- El Meta-Analisis Una Metodologia Para La Investiga

You are on page 1of 18

Assignment # 01

Factor Analysis

Using SPSS Statistics 21

Submitted to:

Submitted by:

Mohammad Zainullah

2

Contents

Page No

Introduction 3

FA Equation 3

Sample Size 4

Data Screening 4

Dataset (wiscsem.sav) 4

Utilising SPSS 5

Variable View 6

Data View 6

Further Steps 7

Extraction 8

Rotation 9

The Output 10

Correlation Matrix 10

Communalities 11

Scree Plot 13

Factor Matrix 14

Revised Output 15

Scree Plot 16

Conclusion 18

References 18

3

Factor Analysis

Introduction

Factor analysis (FA) identifies "invisible" factors representing the hidden organization or

"organizing principle" of whatever is being measured with a number of observable measures or

scales (Navarro, F. H., 2006). In the illustrative example we have “Verbal IQ” and “Performance

IQ” as the hidden organization or factors, while 11 variables as observable measures or scales.

Practitioners may use FA for a variety of purposes such as reducing a large number of items from a

questionnaire or survey instrument to a smaller number of components, uncovering latent

dimensions underlying a data set, or examining which items have the strongest association with a

given factor (DiStefano, Zhu & Mîndrilă, , 2009). Once a researcher has used and identified the

number of factors or components underlying a data set, he may wish to use the information about

the factors in subsequent analyses (Gorsuch, 1983).

Factor analysis is thus a method of data reduction. Data reduction is achieved by seeking underlying

un-observable (latent) variables that are reflected in the observed variables (manifest

variables). Many different methods to conduct a factor analysis are: principal axis factor, maximum

likelihood, generalized least squares, un-weighted least squares. Similarly, many different types of

rotations can be used after the initial extraction of factors, including orthogonal rotations (varimax

and equimax), which requires the factors not to be correlated, and oblique rotations (promax),

which allow the factors to be correlated with one another. Different factor analysis methods may

leads to different results analyzing the same data set.

I have conducted factor analysis using Maximum likelihood method, and the Varimax as the

rotation method.

FA Equation:

FA is a dimensionality reduction multivariate and variable-focused technique i.e., FA represents,

the original variables X1, X2, X3, …… Xn in smaller numbers of underlying factors F1, F2, F3,

………… Fm, whereas m<<<n. The underlying factors are latent or hidden or un-observable

variables.

Unlike Principal Component Analysis (PCA), FA is based on proper statistical model and the ith

original variable Xi can be given by

Xi-µi = li1F1 + li2F2 + …………………….. + limFm + εi

lim = ith factor loading or loading of mth factor on the ith variable or influence of Fm on Xi

It can be positive or negative (values range +1 to -1).

εi = ith Error term

4

Var (Xi) = ∑𝒎 𝟐

𝒊=𝟏 𝒍𝒊𝒋 + ΨI

𝒍𝒊𝒋𝟐 = Communality of the model, also noted as ℎ𝑖 2 , represents part of variance contributed

by the factors, it’s like R2, the more communality value the better.

Sample Size

Field (2005) reviews many suggestions about the sample size necessary for factor analysis and

concludes that it depends on many things. In general over 300 cases is probably adequate but

communalities after extraction should probably be above 0.5 (Field, 2005). Tabachnick and Fidell

(2001, page 588) cite Comrey and Lee's (1992) regarding sample size: 50 cases is very poor, 100 is

poor, 200 is fair, 300 is good, 500 is very good, and 1000 or more is excellent. As a rule of thumb,

a minimum of 10 observations per variable is necessary to avoid computational difficulties.

Data Screening

It is important to look at correlation between variables at first. This is because if our test questions

are measuring the same underlying dimension (s), then we would expect the questions to correlate

with each other within reasonable limits. Variables represent questions, so if we find any variables

that do not correlate with any other variables or very few variables correlate with each other then

we should consider excluding these variables before the factor analysis is conducted. The

correlations between variables can be determined using a correlation matrix of all variables. The

opposite problem is when variables correlate too highly, so we have to avoid extreme

multicollinearity and perfect correlation.

Dataset (wiscsem.sav);

The following example demonstrates factor analysis (FA) of 11 subsets of the Wechsler Intelligence

Scale for Children (WISC). The model assesses the relationship between the indicators of IQ, the

two potential underlying constructs or factors representing IQ, i.e., the Verbal IQ and the

Performance IQ.

The Wechsler Intelligence Scale (WIS) is a test designed to measure intelligence in adults and older

adolescents. It is currently in its fourth edition (WAIS-IV), released in 2008 by Pearson. A revised

form of the test, the WAIS-R, was released in 1981 and consisted of six verbal and five

performance subtests. The verbal tests are: “Information, Comprehension, Arithmetic, Digit Span,

Similarities, and Vocabulary” and the Performance subtests are: “Picture Arrangement, Picture

Completion, Block Design, Object Assembly, and Digit Symbol”, which are used as variables in the

factor analysis to follow. The question was whether we can reproduce the Verbal vs. Nonverbal

distinction, with the appropriate subtests grouping into each category (Verbal IQ, Performance IQ),

5

using factor analysis. In the illustrative factor analysis, a “verbal IQ” and a “performance IQ” were

obtained as two final factors extracted.

The dataset “wiscsem.sav” incorporating subscale scores for the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for

Children is downloaded from the website given as under:

http://psych.colorado.edu/~carey/Courses/PSYC7291/ClassDataSets.htm

Variable Label

(Revised Form)

Information info

Comprehension comp

Arithmetic arith Verbal IQ

Similarities simil

Vocabulary vocab

Digit Span digit

Picture Completion pictcomp

Paragraph Arrangement parang

Block Design block Performance IQ

Object Assembly object

Coding coding

Utilising SPSS

After placing the dataset file “wiscsem.sav” in the folder C:\Documents and

Settings\Administrator\Desktop\FA June 23 Important\WAIS-R, I activated the file within the

SPSS 21 environment. The Variable View, Data View and the subsequent steps are shown below:

6

Variable View

Data View

7

Further Steps

To conduct FA, after initiating the program SPSS 21, selected “Analyze” menu and then chose

“Data Reduction” as FA is intended to reduce the complexity in a set of data, so after Analyze >

Data reduction, chose “Factor” for FA i.e., Analyze > Data Reduction > Factor as shown in

the figure given below:

To select an “extraction method” and a “rotation method.” Hit the “Extraction” button to specify

extraction method.

8

Extraction Selection:

In this dialog box, I have left the box labeled “Un-rotated factor solution” in its default setting,

while checked the box for a “Scree plot” to have a Scree diagram which is one of the ways to

decide how many factors to extract visually.

Thirdly, in the “Extract” section, the default setting is to use the Kaiser stopping criterion (i.e., all

factors with eigenvalues greater than 1) to decide how many factors to extract. We can opt for

factors having a higher eigenvalue by setting the value in the specified filed. Alternatively if we

already know about the number of factors to extract then we can put the number into the box.

After clicking the Continue, the main box will be in focus again for Rotation selection.

9

Rotation Selection:

Clicking the “Rotation” tab, leads us to choose a “rotation method” for our factor analysis. A

rotation method gets factors as different from each other as possible, and thus helps to interpret the

factors by putting each variable primarily on one of the factors. We have to decide whether we want

an “orthogonal” solution (e.g., Quartimax, Equimax, Promax, Varimax) i.e., factors are not highly

correlated with each other, or an “oblique” solution (e.g., Direct Oblimin) i.e., factors are correlated

with one another. I have used Varimax method for factor rotation.

Also the “rotated solution” checkbox is checked to have the factor loadings for each individual

variable in our dataset, also to have make up names for different factors.

Hitting “Continue” in the sub-dialog, and then “OK” in the main dialog to see the output:

10

SPSS Output:

Correlation Matrix

Inform Compre Arith Simila Vocab Digit Picture Paragraph Block Object Coding

ation hension metic rities ulary Span Completion Arrangement Design Assembly

Information 1.000 .467 .494 .513 .625 .345 .230 .202 .229 .185 .007

Comprehension .467 1.000 .392 .510 .531 .236 .407 .187 .369 .322 .061

Arithmetic .494 .392 1.000 .369 .387 .269 .155 .227 .272 .043 .090

Similarities .513 .510 .369 1.000 .538 .260 .369 .298 .261 .269 -.041

Vocabulary .625 .531 .387 .538 1.000 .294 .285 .132 .297 .185 .100

Digit Span .345 .236 .269 .260 .294 1.000 .075 .148 .073 .035 .173

Picture Completion .230 .407 .155 .369 .285 .075 1.000 .249 .382 .363 -.072

Paragraph Arrangement .202 .187 .227 .298 .132 .148 .249 1.000 .351 .253 .038

Block Design .229 .369 .272 .261 .297 .073 .382 .351 1.000 .399 .107

Object Assembly .185 .322 .043 .269 .185 .035 .363 .253 .399 1.000 .053

Coding .007 .061 .090 -.041 .100 .173 -.072 .038 .107 .053 1.000

It is important to look at correlation between variables at first. The correlations between variables

can be determined by using a correlation matrix of all variables. The problem of collinearity will

exist if the correlation with other variables is higher than or equal to 0.9. Also we have to avoid

extreme multicollinearity and perfect correlation, which by looking into the correlation matrix, I

didn’t find any such problems.

11

Approx. Chi-Square 502.886

Bartlett's Test of

df 55

Sphericity

Sig. .000

and values closer to 1 are better. A value of 0.6 is a suggested minimum, we have KMO value as

0.828, which is closer to 1 and reflects data adequacy for factor analysis, so we can go ahead with

the analysis. Kaiser (1974) recommends accepting values greater than 0.5. Furthermore values

between 0.5 and 0.7 are mediocre, values between 0.7 and 0.8 are good, values between 0.8 and 0.9

are great, values above 0.9 are superb (Hutcheson & Sofroniou, 1999).

Bartlett's Test of Sphericity - It tests the null hypothesis that the correlation matrix is an identity

matrix. P-value = .000 < .001 is significant and thus we can reject the null hypothesis that

correlation matrix is an identity matrix, so we can proceed to conduct factor analysis.

Communalities

Information .514 .637 Communalities – These are estimates of that part of

Comprehension .448 .506 the variability in each variable that is shared with

Arithmetic .336 .401 others.

Similarities .451 .545

Initial - The individual communalities tell how well

Vocabulary .515 .585

the model is working for the individual variables, and

Digit Span .180 .204 the total communality gives an overall assessment of

Picture Completion .299 .444 performance.

Paragraph .210 .196

Arrangement Communalities less than 0.5 (inadequate) may be due

to cases well below 300 in numbers (Field, 2005)

Block Design .336 .666

Object Assembly .268 .339

Coding .087 .087

Extraction - The values in this column indicate the proportion of each variable's variance that can

be explained by the retained factors (F1, F2, F3). Variables with high values are well represented in

the common factor space, while variables with low values are not well represented. They are the

reproduced variances from the factors that we have extracted. We can find these values on the

diagonal of the reproduced correlation matrix.

12

The communalities for the ith variable are computed by taking the sum of the squared loadings for

that variable. This can be expressed as below:

For example, to compute the communality for the original variable “Information”, we square the

factor loadings for “Information” (from the Factor Matrix) and then add the as under :

We can think of these values as multiple R2 values for regression models predicting the variables

of interest from the 3 factors. In other words, if we perform multiple regression of original variable

“Information” against the three common factors, we obtain an R2 = 0.637, indicating that about

63% of the variation in “Information” is explained by the factor model. The results in the table

given above, suggest that the factor analysis is better in explaining the variations in “Information,

Comprehension, Similarities, and Vocabulary” variables.

So, one assessment of how well this model is doing can be obtained from the communalities, when

values are closer to one. This would indicate that the model explains most of the variation for

those variables. In this case, the model does better for some variables than it does for others. The

model explains “Block Design” the best, and better the other variables such as “Information,

Comprehension, Similarities and the Vocabulary”. However, for other variables such as “Digit

Span, Paragraph Arrangement” the model does not do a good job, explaining only about one

quarter of the variation.

Loadings Loadings

Total % of Cumulative Total % of Cumulative Total % of Cumulative

Variance % Variance % Variance %

1 3.829 34.806 34.806 3.330 30.271 30.271 2.399 21.811 21.811

2 1.442 13.109 47.915 .876 7.959 38.231 1.800 16.365 38.176

3 1.116 10.147 58.062 .404 3.669 41.900 .410 3.724 41.900

4 .890 8.092 66.153

5 .768 6.985 73.138

6 .633 5.753 78.891

7 .595 5.412 84.303

8 .522 4.749 89.051

9 .471 4.281 93.332

10 .419 3.806 97.138

11 .315 2.862 100.000

13

Factor - The initial number of factors is the same as the number of variables (11) used in the factor

analysis. However, not all 11 factors will be retained but with the help of Kaiser’s rule or Scree

plot, important factors will be extracted and retained.

Initial Eigenvalues - Eigenvalues are the variances of the factors. Each variable has a variance of

1, as the variables are standardized, and the total variance is equal to the number of variables used

in the analysis, which is 11.

Total - This column contains the eigenvalues. The first factor will always account for the most

variance and hence have the highest eigenvalue, each successive factor will account for less and less

variance.

% of Variance - This column contains the percent of total variance accounted for by each factor.

So 34.806% of total variance is explained by or accounted for Factor 1, 13.109% of the total

variance explained by Factor 2, and 10.147% by Factor 3.

Cumulative % - This column contains the cumulative percentage of variance accounted for by the

current and all preceding factors. For example, the third row shows a value of 58.062. This means

that the first three factors together account for 58.062% of the total variance.

Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings – In this section the number of factors retained are

mentioned, one row for each retained factor. The values are based on the common variance and not

on the total variance.

Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings – It represents the distribution of the variance after the

Varimax rotation. Varimax rotation tries to maximize the variance of each of the factors, so the

total amount of variance accounted for is redistributed over the three extracted factors.

Scree Plot:

14

The Scree plot is the graph of eigenvalue against the factor number. In the Scree Plot, the slope of

curve seems to levels out after two factors, where as Kaiser’s rule (Eigen values > 1) guides us to

having 3 factors. From the second factor on, the line is almost flat, meaning the each successive

factor is accounting for smaller and smaller amounts of the total variance, so retaining two factors is

recommended (Cattell, 1966).

Factor Matrix

1 2 3

un-rotated factor loadings i.e.,

Information .719 -.340 .065

Comprehension .703 .005 -.107 correlations between variables and

Arithmetic .552 -.180 .252 factors and how the variables are

Similarities .696 -.125 -.212 weighted for each factor or the

Vocabulary .727 -.238 .005

variables load on the extracted

Digit Span .354 -.239 .146

Picture Completion .504 .308 -.309 factors. Because these are correlations,

Paragraph Arrangement .371 .234 .055 possible values range from -1 to

Block Design .561 .549 .225

+1. The columns under this heading

Object Assembly .406 .382 -.167

Coding .075 .025 .285 “Factor” are the un-rotated factors that

Extraction Method: Maximum Likelihood. have been extracted.

3 factors extracted. 11 iterations required.

Factor

1 2 3

Information .779 .156 .073

Comprehension .551 .449 -.032

Arithmetic .556 .140 .269

Extraction Method: Maximum Likelihood.

Similarities .620 .366 -.160

Vocabulary .721 .252 .035 Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.

Digit Span .431 -.003 .134 Rotation converged in 5 iterations.

Picture .202 .605 -.194

Completion

Paragraph .154 .392 .135

Arrangement

Block Design .118 .713 .379

Object Assembly .084 .573 -.050

Coding .054 .005 .290

15

The Rotated Factor Matrix shows us the factor loadings (correlations between variables and

factors, and how the variables are weighted for each factor) for each variable, i.e., highlighting the

factor that each variable loaded most strongly on (high positive loadings). Based on these factor

loadings, I have spotted the factors as:

1. The first 6 variables load high positively on Factor 1, which can be termed as “Verbal IQ”,

these are Information, Comprehension, Arithmetic, Similarities, Vocabulary and Digital

Span.

2. The variables “Picture Completion, Paragraph Arrangement, Block Design, Object

Assembly” load strongly or high positive on Factor 2, which can be termed as “Performance

IQ”

3. The variable named Coding load positively on Factor 3. Probably Factor 3 is “Freedom from

Distraction,” because these are concentration-intensive tasks. But these factor loadings

(correlations between variables and factors and how the variables are weighted for each

factor or the variables load on factors) are less than 0.3, implying no more meaningful, so

preferring 2-factor solution and re-conducting factor analysis with a pre-set 2-factor

solution.

Revised Output

It was important to know whether I can differentiate “verbal” from “nonverbal” tasks. I have got a

3-factor solution, based on Kaiser’s Rule (Eigen Values > 1), the variables “Digit Span”, and

“Coding” loadings on factor 3 (weak positively), creating some confusion so forcing SPSS’s

manually to extract two factors F1 and F2.

To achieve the pre-set number of factors, going back to the main dialog, and then to the

“Extraction” sub-dialog. Under “Extract,” inserted “Number of factors = 2” and clicked continue

and OK.

16

Total % of Cumulative Total % of Cumulative

Variance % Variance %

1 3.829 34.806 34.806 2.355 21.409 21.409

2 1.442 13.109 47.915 1.765 16.050 37.458

3 1.116 10.147 58.062

4 .890 8.092 66.153

5 .768 6.985 73.138

6 .633 5.753 78.891

7 .595 5.412 84.303

8 .522 4.749 89.051

9 .471 4.281 93.332

10 .419 3.806 97.138

11 .315 2.862 100.000

Extraction Method: Maximum Likelihood.

The revised output has two extracted factors, and that each factor accounts for a 37.458 % of the

total variability in the variables.

Scree Plot:

Factor

1 2

Information .783 .172

Comprehension .534 .471 Extraction Method: Maximum Likelihood.

Arithmetic .560 .153 Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser

Similarities .584 .386 Normalization.

Vocabulary .727 .255 Rotation converged in 3 iterations.

Digit Span .430 .022

Picture Completion .176 .601

Paragraph Arrangement .146 .407

Block Design .168 .614

Object Assembly .056 .610

Coding .069 .020

17

In the Rotated Factor Matrix, we have the revised factor loadings (correlations between variables

and factors and how the variables are weighted for each factor or the variables load on factors). The

variable “Coding” doesn’t load strongly on either of the extracted factors 1 or 2, but the two factors

of “Verbal” and “Performance” IQ have relatively high positive factor loadings and have thus

emerged more strongly. These factors can be used as variables for further analysis.

Factor scores FAC1_1 and FAC2_1 are the composite variables which provide information about a

variable’s placement on the factor(s). Once a researcher has used FA and has identified the number

of factors or components underlying a data set, he/she may wish to use the information about the

factors in subsequent analyses (Gorsuch, 1983). To use FA information in follow-up studies, the

researcher must create scores to represent each individual’s placement on the factor(s) identified

from the FA. These factor scores may then be used to investigate the research questions of interest

(DiStefano, Zhu & Mîndrilă, 2009).

18

Conclusion:

We have 11 observable variables that identify two hidden factors F1 and F2. Factor loadings on

hidden Factor 1 across the six variables: are 0.783, 0.534, 0.560, 0.584, 0.727, 0.430. These factor

loadings indicate that observable measures 1 through 6 can be used to "describe" hidden Factor 1; in

other words, Factor 1 has characteristics very similar to what observable measures 1 through 6

measure. Observable variables 7 through 11 are not useful to describe hidden Factor 1 because their

factor loadings on hidden Factor 1 are too small (not > or = to .50).

Similarly, factor loadings on hidden Factor 2 across the 4 variables are .601, .407, .614, .610, these

factor loadings indicate that observable measures 7 through 10 can be used to "describe" hidden

Factor 2; in other words, Factor 2 has characteristics very similar to what observable measures 7

through 10 measure. Observable variables 1 through 6 and 11 are not useful to describe hidden

Factor 2 because their factor loadings on hidden Factor 1 are too small (not > or = to .50).

Factor analysis has thus identified "invisible" factors F1 and F2, which represent the hidden

organization or "organizing principle" of Verbal IQ and Performance IQ, with a number of

observable measures or scales (Navarro, F. H., 2006). Factor scores thus indicate how each

"hidden" factors (F1 and F2) are associated with the "observable" variables used in our analysis.

References:

Cattell, R. B. (1966). The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate behavioral research,

1(2), 245-276.

DiStefano, C., Zhu, M., & Mindrila, D. (2009). Understanding and using factor scores:

Considerations for the applied researcher. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 14(20), 1-

11.

Field, A. (2005). Discovering statistics using SPSS (2nd edition), London: Sage

Gorsuch, R. (1983). Factor analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.

Hutcheson, G. D., & Sofroniou, N. (1999). The multivariate social scientist: Introductory statistics

using generalized linear models. Sage.

Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using Multivariate Statistics (4th Ed.). Needham

Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

- The Implementation of World Class Manufacturing Techniques in Egyptian Manufacturing Firms an Empirical StudyUploaded bybojanbij
- Attachment and Self-evaluation in Chinese AdolescentsUploaded byLoreca1819
- 3620 Lecture 07Uploaded bytherealreddevil
- Project Management Journal Volume 38 Issue 4 2007 [Doi 10.1002_pmj.20014]Uploaded byMego Plamonia
- Individual Differences in Uses of Humor and Their Relation to Psychological Being- Development of the Humor Styles QuestionnaireUploaded byNman12
- exercise poster wpaUploaded byapi-459408195
- Consumer Perception of Mobile Phone AttributesUploaded byShadab Ashfaq
- GabrielUploaded byHimanshu Roy
- Molino Monica Tesi PhDUploaded byTopala Sorin
- Imran MethodologyUploaded byjohna_kaif
- 1184-3567-1-PB (1)Uploaded byAndriano P S
- Para MapUploaded byananyaajatasatru
- Measuring Adult AttachmentUploaded byLisaDarling
- Chapter5_3 - CopyUploaded byabhi
- 18_EIJMMS_VOL1_ISSUE3Uploaded byJoshuva Daniel
- Effect of TQM Practices on Quality Performance through Operating Performance – An Empirical StudyUploaded byAnonymous kw8Yrp0R5r
- Chandler et al_Causation and effectuation processes.pdfUploaded byNdivhuho Neosta
- Mathematics Learning Performance and MathematicsUploaded byRomeo Madrona Jr
- 02 HSQ Article Martin Et Al (1)Uploaded byAndrea Negri
- El Meta-Analisis Una Metodologia Para La InvestigaUploaded byMarco Adrian Criollo Armijos
- Athlete Perceptions of the ImpactsUploaded bySophia Amin
- COMPETENCY SKILL OF TEACHER TOWARDS ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT.Uploaded byIJAR Journal
- 2008 (Anna Brown) the Impact of Questionnaire Item Format on Ability to Fake GoodUploaded byl_s_tears
- What Cognitive Abilities Are Involved in Trail-making PerformanceUploaded byshivnair
- BacoMind PPTUploaded byKeshob Banerjee
- 7027-28061-1-PB-1 (1).pdfUploaded byDarwin Competente Lagran
- wwwyz.pdfUploaded byAnonymous a7B7WIm
- May Jazz ArticleUploaded bymadseven
- How ghCulturghghghghl ghghUploaded bypaulx93x
- 47121702Uploaded byPulak Saran

- Motion to Modify JudgmentUploaded byErnest Mancenido
- Lee County, Florida - request to join ICE 287(g) programUploaded byJ Cox
- Examen PragmatismUploaded byOana Madalina Platon
- safety in the classroom social studies 1st twsUploaded byapi-216889162
- Risk and Money Management in Binary OptionsUploaded bysumilang
- jeremy michalk avatar projectUploaded byapi-341109318
- Alcatel EVOLVE 2 English UserManualUploaded byJoe Moldovan
- DAFTAR PUSTAKA OPIKUploaded byazry shidiq
- WRAP2C ManualUploaded byShaunVermaak
- Survey regarding cyber crimeUploaded byHarshada Chavan
- Jawaharlal NehruUploaded bySonam Gyatso
- Alfaro ResumeUploaded byAlyana Alfaro
- HRMS_SDDUploaded bySandhya Sasidharan
- Jumpstretch FlexibilityUploaded bymichal900_408346753
- Smart Bus ReportUploaded byRose Maria Dominic
- JMO 1999Uploaded byDr Shyam Sundar Agrawal
- Case of Pajic v. Croatia-2Uploaded byAgnė Litvinaitė
- TaxUploaded byJdaartienda
- Buijsrogge (2014)Uploaded byJimmy Mundell
- AP5131_Product_Reference_Guide_englisch.pdfUploaded byisc_aesz
- resume 2017 1Uploaded byapi-356637264
- ENGLISH SUFFIXES.docUploaded bylavelez
- Respiratory System NotesUploaded byKomalesh Theeran
- List of BooksUploaded byKaran Suri
- August 1, 2012Uploaded byThe Kohler Villager
- tda7318Uploaded byFelipe De Jesús Jonapa
- Sales TcodesUploaded byTalha Khalid
- LIT 1 Reviewer.pdfUploaded byFlorence Orfiano
- Unilever - Report Full DocumentUploaded byMeera Kapur
- Movie-World Feature Films August 1973Uploaded bySabuCat