Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-tnzcf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-14T21:59:31.227Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Maximum Likelihood Methods in Treating Outliers and Symmetrically Heavy-Tailed Distributions for Nonlinear Structural Equation Models with Missing Data

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

Sik-Yum Lee and
Ye-Mao Xia
Sik-Yum Lee*
Affiliation:
The Chinese University of Hong Kong
Ye-Mao Xia
Affiliation:
The Chinese University of Hong Kong
*
Requests for reprints should be sent to S. Y. Lee, Department of Statistics, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, N. T., Hong Kong. E-mail: sylee@sparc20c.sta.cuhk.edu.hk
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

By means of more than a dozen user friendly packages, structural equation models (SEMs) are widely used in behavioral, education, social, and psychological research. As the underlying theory and methods in these packages are vulnerable to outliers and distributions with longer-than-normal tails, a fundamental problem in the field is the development of robust methods to reduce the influence of outliers and the distributional deviation in the analysis. In this paper we develop a maximum likelihood (ML) approach that is robust to outliers and symmetrically heavy-tailed distributions for analyzing nonlinear SEMs with ignorable missing data. The analytic strategy is to incorporate a general class of distributions into the latent variables and the error measurements in the measurement and structural equations. A Monte Carlo EM (MCEM) algorithm is constructed to obtain the ML estimates, and a path sampling procedure is implemented to compute the observed-data log-likelihood and then the Bayesian information criterion for model comparison. The proposed methodologies are illustrated with simulation studies and an example.

Keywords

outliersheavy-tailed distributionsMCEM algorithmGibbs samplerpath samplingBayesian information criterion

Information

Type
Original Paper
Information
Psychometrika , Volume 71 , Issue 3 , September 2006, pp. 565 - 585
Copyright
Copyright © 2006 The Psychometric Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

The research described herein was fully supported by a grant (CUHK 4243/03H) from the Rearch Grants Council of the Hong Kong Special Administration Region. The authors are thankful to the Editor, the Associate Editor, and anonymous reviewers for valuable comments which improve the paper significantly, and are grateful to ICPSR and the relevant funding agency for allowing the use of their data.

References

Bentler, P.M. (2004). EQS6: Structural equations program manual, Encino, CA: Multivariate Software.Google Scholar
Berkane, M., Bentler, P.M. (1988). Estimating of the contamination parameters and identification of outliers in multivariate data. Sociological Methods & Research, 17, 55–64.10.1177/0049124188017001003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowman, K.O., Shenton, L.R. (1988). Properties of estimators for the gamma distribution, Dordrecht: Marcel Dekker.Google Scholar
Browne, M.W. (1987). Robustness of statistical influence in factor analysis and related models. Biometrika, 74, 375–384.10.1093/biomet/74.2.375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Browne, M.W., Shapiro, A. (1988). Robustness of normal theory methods in the analysis of linear latent variable models. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 41, 193–208.10.1111/j.2044-8317.1988.tb00896.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, N.A. (1982). Robust procedure in multivariate analysis I: Robust covariance estimation. Applied Statistics, 29, 231–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cowles, M.K. (1996). Accelerating Monte Carlo Markov Chains convergence for cumulative-link generalized linear modes. Statistics and Computing, 6, 101–111.10.1007/BF00162520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dempster, A.P., Laird, N.M., Rubin, D.B. (1977). Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the EM algorithm (with discussion). Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 39, 1–38.10.1111/j.2517-6161.1977.tb01600.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelman, A., Meng, X.L. (1998). Simulating normalizing constants: From importance sampling to bridge sampling to path sampling. Statistical Science, 13, 163–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geman, S., Geman, D. (1984). Stochastic relaxation, Gibbs distribution, and the Bayesian restoration of images. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 6, 721–741.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hastings, W.K. (1970). Monte Carlo sampling methods using Markov chains and their applications. Biometrika, 57, 97–100.10.1093/biomet/57.1.97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jöreskog, K.G., Sörbom, D. (1996). LISREL 8: Structural equation modelling with the SIMPLIS command language, London: Scientific Software International.Google Scholar
Kano, Y., Berkane, M., Bentler, P.M. (1993). Statistical inference based on pseudo-maximum likelihood estimators in elliptical populations. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 88, 135–143.10.1080/01621459.1993.10594303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kass, R.E., Raftery, A.E. (1995). Bayes factor. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 90, 773–795.10.1080/01621459.1995.10476572CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lange, K.L., Little, R.J.A., Taylor, J. M. G. (1989). Robust statistical modelling using the t-distribution. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 84, 881–896.Google Scholar
Lee, M., Lomax, R.G. (2005). The effects of varying degrees of nonnormality in structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 12, 1–27.10.1207/s15328007sem1201_1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, S.Y., Song, X.Y. (2004). Maximum likelihood analysis of a general latent variable model with hierarchically mixed data. Biometrics, 60, 624–636.10.1111/j.0006-341X.2004.00211.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lee, S.Y., Song, X.Y. (2003). Model comparison of nonlinear structural equation models with fixed covariates. Psychometrika, 68, 27–47.10.1007/BF02296651CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, S.Y., Song, X.Y., Lee, J.C.K. (2003). Maximum likelihood estimation of nonlinear structure models with ignorable missing data. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 28, 111–134.10.3102/10769986028002111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, S.Y., Zhu, H.T. (2002). Maximum likelihood estimation of nonlinear structural equation models. Psychometrika, 67, 189–210.10.1007/BF02294842CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Little, R.J.A. (1988). Robust estimation of mean and covariance matrix from data with missing values. Applied Statistics, 37, 23–39.10.2307/2347491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Little, R.J.A., Rubin, D.B. (1987). Statistical analysis with missing data, Dordrecht: Wiley.Google Scholar
Louis, T.A. (1982). Finding the observed information matrix when using the EM algorithm. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 44, 226–233.10.1111/j.2517-6161.1982.tb01203.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mardia, V.V. (1970). Measures of multivariate skewness and kurtosis with application. Biometrika, 57, 519–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meng, X.L., Rubin, D.B. (1993). Maximum likelihood estimation via the ECM algorithm: A general framework. Biometrika, 80, 267–278.10.1093/biomet/80.2.267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Metropolis, N., Rosenbluth, A.W., Rosenbluth, M.N., Teller, A.H., Teller, E. (1953). Equations of state calculations by fast computing machines. Journal of Chemical Physics, 21, 1087–1092.10.1063/1.1699114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ogasawara, H. (2005). Asymptotic robustness of the asymptotic bias in structural equation modeling. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 49, 771–783.10.1016/j.csda.2004.06.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwarz, G. (1978). Estimating the dimension of a model. Annals of Statistics, 6, 461–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Song, X.Y., Lee, S.Y. (2005). Maximum likelihood analysis of nonlinear structural equation models with dichotomons variables. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 40, 151–177.10.1207/s15327906mbr4002_1CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Song, X.Y., Lee, S.Y. (2004). Bayesian analysis of two-level nonlinear structural equation models with continuous and polytomous data. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 57, 29–52.10.1348/000711004849259CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Watanabe, M., Yamaguchi, K. (2004). The EM algorithm and relate statistical models, Dordrecht: Marcel Dekker.Google Scholar
Wei, G.C.G., Tanner, M.A. (1990). Monte Carlo implementation of the EM algorithm and the poor man’s data augmentation algorithms (in theory and methods). Journal of the American Statistical Association, 85, 699–704.10.1080/01621459.1990.10474930CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yuan, K.H., Bentler, P.M. (1997). Mean and covariance structure analysis: theoretical and practical improvements (in theory and methods). Journal of the American Statistical Association, 92, 767–774.10.1080/01621459.1997.10474029CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yuan, K.H., Bentler, P.M. (1998a). Robust mean and covariance structure analysis. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 51, 63–88.10.1111/j.2044-8317.1998.tb00667.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yuan, K.H., Bentler, P.M. (1998b). Structural equation modelling with robust covariance. Sociological Methodology, 28, 363–396.10.1111/0081-1750.00052CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yuan, K.H., Bentler, P.M. (2000). Robust mean and covariance structure analysis through iteratively reweighted least squares. Psychometrika, 65, 43–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar