Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2106.09845

Distributionally Weighted Least Squares in Structural Equation Modeling

Han Du·Peter M. Bentler
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

In real data analysis with structural equation modeling, data are unlikely to be exactly normally distributed. If we ignore the non-normality reality, the parameter estimates, standard error estimates, and model fit statistics from normal theory based methods such as maximum likelihood (ML) and normal theory based generalized least squares estimation (GLS) are unreliable. On the other hand, the asymptotically distribution free (ADF) estimator does not rely on any distribution assumption but cannot demonstrate its efficiency advantage with small and modest sample sizes. The methods which adopt misspecified loss functions including ridge GLS (RGLS) can provide better estimates and inferences than the normal theory based methods and the ADF estimator in some cases. We propose a distributionally-weighted least squares (DLS) estimator, and expect that it can perform better than the existing generalized least squares, because it combines normal theory based and ADF based generalized least squares estimation. Computer simulation results suggest that model-implied covariance based DLS (DLS_M) provided relatively accurate and efficient estimates in terms of RMSE. In addition, the empirical standard errors, the relative biases of standard error estimates, and the Type I error rates of the Jiang-Yuan rank adjusted model fit test statistic (T_JY) in DLS_M were competitive with the classical methods including ML, GLS, and RGLS. The performance of DLS_M depends on its tuning parameter a. We illustrate how to implement DLS_M and select the optimal a by a bootstrap procedure in a real data example.

Explore related subjects

stat.ME

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Han Du, Peter M. Bentler. 2021-06-17. Distributionally Weighted Least Squares in Structural Equation Modeling. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000388

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Bias-Correction for Privacy-Protected Spatial Autoregressive Models with Application to Restaurant Network Analysis

Spatial autoregressive (SAR) models and their extensions are important tools for studying network effects. However, with an increasing emphasis on data privacy, data providers often implement protection measures that render standard SAR models inapplicable. In this study, we introduce a privacy-protected SAR model that incorporates noise into both the response and covariates to meet privacy requirements. With noise present in both components, the traditional quasi-maximum likelihood estimator becomes difficult to compute because the likelihood function cannot be directly formulated. To bypass this hurdle, we begin with a pseudo-likelihood approach, initially omitting the noise in the covariates. A Newton-Raphson algorithm is then applied to compute the estimator; however, the estimator is biased. To address this, we propose a bias-corrected Newton-Raphson-type algorithm that simultaneously accounts for noise in both the response and covariates. We further show, under appropriate regularity conditions, that the resulting estimator is consistent and asymptotically normal. To further enhance computational efficiency, we also develop a bias-corrected least squares estimator. Several extensions are discussed, and the finite-sample performance of the proposed methods is evaluated through extensive simulations. We apply the proposed methodology to restaurant transaction data from a third-party payment platform. Our method identifies a statistically significant competitive network effect among restaurants and further reveals meaningful restaurant-customer interaction patterns.

stat.ME↗
arXiv2026

A variational framework for modal estimation

Multivariate mode estimation arises in many statistical problems such as inverse problems, multimodal sampling, and density-based clustering, but becomes challenging in moderate to high dimensions, especially when the underlying density is not directly evaluable. We introduce GERVE (Gibbs-measure Entropy-Regularized Variational Estimation), a sample-based method for estimating multivariate modes by approximating Gibbs distributions directly from samples, without estimating or evaluating the density. GERVE uses Gaussian-mixture variational annealing and natural-gradient optimization, producing a mixture concentrated in high-density regions whose component responsibilities also provide a clustering of the observations. We prove theoretical guarantees in two regimes: as the Gibbs temperature goes to zero, the optimal variational mixture concentrates around the global modes of the population density; at fixed positive temperature, we prove existence, consistency, and asymptotic normality of empirical maximizers and propose a bootstrap procedure for uncertainty quantification. Simulations and a real-data experiment show that GERVE accurately recovers modes and produces meaningful clusters.

stat.ME↗
arXiv2026

Objective Model Prior Probabilities in Variable Selection

For many years it was routine to use equal model prior probabilities in Bayesian model uncertainty analysis. At least twenty years ago it became clear that this was problematic, leading to support of much too large models in the increasingly huge model spaces being considered in genomics and other fields. A popular replacement was to adopt a suggestion of Harold Jeffreys for the variable selection problem in which a total of $k$ possible variables are being considered for inclusion in the model: give the collection of all models containing $d$ variables ($d = 0, . . . , k$) prior probability $1/(k + 1)$ and then divide this prior probability equally among the models in the collection. Many other choices of model prior probabilities that impose severe parsimony have also been introduced. We begin by reviewing the problems with using equal model prior probabilities and then discuss some serious problems with the Jeffreys choice. Finally, we introduce and study a number of objective alternative choices of model prior probabilities, from both numerical and theoretical perspectives.

stat.ME↗