2005
DOI: 10.7275/jyj1-4868
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

7
661
0
41

Year Published

2009
2009
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1,768 publications
(847 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
7
661
0
41
Order By: Relevance
“…Some predictors are measured at the organizational level, but these are considered to be influences upon the individual's engagement decisions and do not therefore necessitate a need for clustering.3 EFA can be used as an analytical tool in and of itself(Costello & Osborne, 2005;Rummel, 1970) or it can be used as an intermediary step in a larger analytical process, often to create independent or dependent variables that are more amenable to analysis(Santos, 1999). The latter approach is used in this research.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Some predictors are measured at the organizational level, but these are considered to be influences upon the individual's engagement decisions and do not therefore necessitate a need for clustering.3 EFA can be used as an analytical tool in and of itself(Costello & Osborne, 2005;Rummel, 1970) or it can be used as an intermediary step in a larger analytical process, often to create independent or dependent variables that are more amenable to analysis(Santos, 1999). The latter approach is used in this research.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…KMO measures for all items were above 0.70, which is acceptable for this research(Kaiser, 1974). The overall KMO score was 0.80, which is considered "meritorious" and more than sufficient for factor analysis.5Costello and Osborne (2005) note that due to the nature of social science data, traditional break points utilized in physical science research for retaining factors should be relaxed. Therefore, two factors with eigenvalues above 1.0 were retained in this analysis and all components with rotated factor loadings above 0.60 were included(Kaiser, 1958).6 Because the categorical variable for the sector was included as a series of dummy variables, only k−1 variable can be included in the final model.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To test whether an instrument is also suitable for a different target group, a CFA should be used ( Costello and Osborne, 2005 ). Since the instrument should also be used with, for example, students with learning disabilities, it should be tested on a group of special needs students in study 3 and the factor structure should be re-examined.…”
Section: Studymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Based on the EFA, factor loadings for all items ranged from 0.409 (AC-1) to 0.899 (AC-4; see Table 3). Seven items displayed have lower than 0.4 factor loadings (AC-3: We are effective in transforming existing information into new knowledge, RA-2: The company's financial capital, MT-2: Our customers tend to look for a new product all the time, MT-3: We are witnessing demand for our products and service from customers who never bought them before, TT-4: A large number of new product ideas have been made possible through technological breakthroughs in our industry, and CE-1: Our firm's reconfiguration built heavily on prior technology), which were not considered for further analysis to ensure the quality of the measures (Costello & Osborne, 2005). Although one item of CE (CE-4: Simple adjustments to existing technology), two items of AC (i.e., AC-1: We have effective routines to identify, value, and import new information and knowledge, AC-2: We have adequate routines to assimilate new information and knowledge), three items of CI (i.e., CI-1: Competition in our industry is cutthroat, CI-2: There are many "promotion wars" in our industry, CI-3: Anything that one competitor can offer, others can match readily), and one item of MT (typically MT-1: In our kind of business, customer's product preferences change quite a bit over time) fell below the minimum of 0.5 as a common cutoff point (Anderson & Gerbing, 1988), they still satisfied the criteria of 0.4 set by other work such as Hair et al (2010).…”
Section: Exploratory Factor Analysis (Efa)mentioning
confidence: 99%