Confirmatory Factor Analysis With AMOS

Please read pages 732 through 749 in

• Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.).
Boston: Allyn & Bacon. ISBN-10: 0205459382. ISBN-13: 9780205459384
(Students should already have this text from the prerequisite PSYC 7431
course).

The data for this lesson are available at T&F’s data site and also from my SPSS
data page, file CFA-Wisc.sav. Download the file and bring it into SPSS and pass
it to AMOS. Alternatively, you can just boot AMOS Graphic, click “Select data
files,” and then select CFA-Wisc.sav. Minor culling has already taken place, as
described in the textbook.

CFA-AMOS.doc
 2

Draw two latent variables, one with six indicators and one with five
indicators, like this:
 3

Click “List variables in data set” and then drag the names of the measured
variables into the rectangles, as shown below.
 4

Using Object Properties, name the errors and factors, fix both factors to variance
1, remove the fixed path coefficients, and draw a two-headed arrow like this:
 5

Click “Analysis properties” and select the desired output:

Click “Calculate estimates.” Click “View the output path diagram” and “View
Text.”
Look at the diagram with standardized estimates. Note that the solution is the
same as that shown in T & F Figure 14.10. The error variances for the measured
variables, shown on the left in Figure 14.10, are simply 1 minus the value of R2 shown in
the Amos diagram. For example, for Info, 1 - .58 = .42.
Look at the text output. The null hypothesis of good fit is rejected, but this may
be simply from having too much power. The fit indices are OK. GFI (.931) exceeds .9,
CFI (.941) does not quite reach the .95 standard, and RMSEA (.06) is between good
(.05) and adequate (.08).
The Standardized Residual Covariances are large for Comp-Pictcomp and Digit-
Coding. The Modification Indices for Covariances suggests linkage between e2 (error
in comp) and Performance IQ – perhaps we need a path from Performance IQ to Comp.
The Modification Indices for Regression Weights suggests linkage between Comp and
(Object and Pictcomp), both of which are connected with Performance IQ. Again, this
 6

suggests a path from Performance IQ to Comp. Let us add that path and see what
happens.
Diagram for Model 1.
 7

Diagram for Model 2.

 8

Look at the text output for the second model. The model fit Chi-square has
dropped from 70.236 to 60.296, a drop of 9.94, which, on one df, is significant. Adding
that path from Performance IQ to Comp has significantly improved the fit of the model.
GFI has increased from .931 to .94, CFI from .941 to .960, and RMSEA has dropped
from .06 to .05.
Notice that the path from Performance IQ to Coding is not statistically significant.
Perhaps we should just drop that variable. Drop it and see what happens.
With Coding out of the model, the goodness of fit Chi-square is no longer
significant, χ 2(33) = 45.018, p = .079. GFI has increased from .94 to .952, CFI from .
960 to .974, and RMSEA has dropped from .05 to .046.

Links
• CFA Using AMOS – Indiana Univ.
• CFA Using SAS Calis
• Wuensch’s Stats Lessons

Karl L. Wuensch
Dept. of Psychology, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC 27858 USA
November, 2008