Evaluating the MSCEIT V2.0 via CFA: comment on Mayer et al. (2003).
This investigation uncovered several substantial errors in the confirmatory factor analysis results reported by J. D. Mayer, P. Salovey, D. R. Caruso, and G. Sitarenios (see record 2003-02341-015). Specifically, the values associated with the close-fit indices (normed fit index, Tucker-Lewis Index, and root-mean-square error of approximation) are inaccurate. A reanalysis of the Mayer et al. subscale intercorrelation matrix provided accurate values of the close-fit indices, which resulted in different evaluations of the models tested by J. D. Mayer et al. Contrary to J. D. Mayer et al., the 1-factor model and the 2-factor model did not provide good fit. Although the 4-factor model was still considered good fitting, the non-constrained 4-factor model yielded a non-positive definite matrix, which was interpreted to be due to the fact that two of the branch-level factors (Perceiving and Facilitating) were collinear, suggesting that a model with 4 factors was implausible.
School of Psychology, Deakin University, Burwood, Victoria, Australia. gignac@deakin.edu.au
Gilles E
GE
Gignac
D003627:Data Interpretation, Statistical; D004644:Emotions; D006801:Humans; D007360:Intelligence; D011594:Psychometrics; D015203:Reproducibility of Results