LESSON 1

What is statistics? Descriptive Statistics Inferential Statistics

Psychometrics
It 's the field of study of the

LEZIONE 1

theory and technique of measurement in psychology.

It includes the measurement of knowledge,

skills, attitudes and personality traits.

The focus is on the

study of differences among individuals.

It

involves the construction of instruments for measuring psychological dimensions.

Statistics
Tests produce measures and these are expressed in

numbers.
The Statistics offer a way to interpret and make sense

of numbers.
Statistics deals

with the ways (described by mathematical formulas) in which a phenomenal reality can be synthesized and then understood.

Statistics
Statistics can be

divided into several branches :

Descriptive Statistics Inferential Statistics

Descriptive Statistics
Aim: synthesize the data through graphical tools and indexes Which describe the salient features of the observed data.
bar charts, pie charts, boxplots, histograms

Locators (eg. media) indicators of variation (eg. variance) indicators of correlation

Inferential Statistics
Aim
To make statements about the nature of a phenomenon observed with a controlled probability of error.

The knowledge of this nature will allow then to make predictions. It includes hypotesis testing.

The hypothesis is based on the law of probability.

Inferential Statistics
A hypothesis is a statement about the statistical probability distribution of one or more of random variables.
The statistical test verifies, in terms of probabilities, the validity of a statistical hypothesis, called the null hypothesis

Ho

Inferential Statistics
Experimental hypotesis

Null hypothesis

Ho

Assumption whose acceptance would make false the idea to verify.

Procedure
Null hypothesis Ho

Experimental hypotesis

Sample selection

Significativity p

Statistical test

Likely to reject the null hypothesis although this is true.

We should establish a priori the probability of error which we consider acceptable for the hypothesis verification

(usually p < 0,05 or p < 0,01)

The mythical

The 'p is the appropriate quantification of the hazard intervention in the evaluation of our statistical tests. The value of p <0.05 is an arbitrary limit and it indicates the acceptance of an error = 5%.
There are no certainties, only a reasonable probability
E. W. Hower

Rejeting the lHo

Conducting a statistical test involves a risk of error. In practice, we usually identify two types of errors

Decision Errors
Rejecting the H0 when true Type I error Accepting H0 when false Type II error

Test of hypothesis testing

Apply a statistical test of significance (e.g.

Students t). We compare its value with the critical value tabulated in the appropriate tables. If the test result exceeds the critical value of significance, then the null hypothesis is rejected and the test results are reported as "statistically significant". Otherwise, the null hypothesis is accepted.

Students t
Values of the distribution t as a function of n (number of subjects) and alpha (a). For n = infinite the distribution is normal

n\
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 40 50 60 100

0.10
3.078 1.886 1.638 1.533 1.476 1.440 1.415 1.397 1.383 1.372 1.363 1.356 1.350 1.345 1.341 1.337 1.333 1.330 1.328 1.325 1.323 1.321 1.319 1.318 1.316 1.315 1.314 1.313 1.311 1.310 1.303 1.299 1.296 1.290 1.282

0.05
6.314 2.920 2.353 2.132 2.015 1.943 1.895 1.860 1.833 1.812 1.796 1.782 1.771 1.761 1.753 1.746 1.740 1.734 1.729 1.725 1.721 1.717 1.714 1.711 1.708 1.706 1.703 1.701 1.699 1.697 1.684 1.676 1.671 1.660 1.645

0.025
12.706 4.303 3.182 2.776 2.571 2.447 2.365 2.306 2.262 2.228 2.201 2.179 2.160 2.145 2.131 2.120 2.110 2.101 2.093 2.086 2.080 2.074 2.069 2.064 2.060 2.056 2.052 2.048 2.045 2.042 2.021 2.009 2.000 1.984 1.960

0.01
31.821 6.965 4.541 3.747 3.365 3.143 2.998 2.896 2.821 2.764 2.718 2.681 2.650 2.624 2.602 2.583 2.567 2.552 2.539 2.528 2.518 2.508 2.500 2.492 2.485 2.479 2.473 2.467 2.462 2.457 2.423 2.403 2.390 2.364 2.326

0.005
63.657 9.925 5.841 4.604 4.032 3.707 3.499 3.355 3.250 3.169 3.106 3.055 3.012 2.977 2.947 2.921 2.898 2.878 2.861 2.845 2.831 2.819 2.807 2.797 2.787 2.779 2.771 2.763 2.756 2.750 2.704 2.678 2.660 2.626 2.576

0.0025

0.001

0.0005

127.321 318.309 636.619 14.089 7.453 5.598 4.773 4.317 4.029 3.833 3.690 3.581 3.497 3.428 3.372 3.326 3.286 3.252 3.222 3.197 3.174 3.153 3.135 3.119 3.104 3.091 3.078 3.067 3.057 3.047 3.038 3.030 2.971 2.937 2.915 2.871 2.807 22.327 10.215 7.173 5.893 5.208 4.785 4.501 4.297 4.144 4.025 3.930 3.852 3.787 3.733 3.686 3.646 3.610 3.579 3.552 3.527 3.505 3.485 3.467 3.450 3.435 3.421 3.408 3.396 3.385 3.307 3.261 3.232 3.174 3.090 31.599 12.924 8.610 6.869 5.959 5.408 5.041 4.781 4.587 4.437 4.318 4.221 4.140 4.073 4.015 3.965 3.922 3.883 3.850 3.819 3.792 3.768 3.745 3.725 3.707 3.690 3.674 3.659 3.646 3.551 3.496 3.460 3.390 3.291

How we should indicate the p value

p = 0,01 or p 0,01 0,02 p = 0,02 or p < 0,05 0,03 p = 0,02 or p < 0,05 0,05 p = 0,05 or p 0,05 0,0023 p = 0,002 or p < 0,01 0,0003 p = 0,001 or p < 0,01 0,000 p < 0,001 p = 0,000 is a logical mistake
0,01

Is Statistics an exact science?

94.5 % of statistics are wrong (Woody Allen) Be careful, the statistics is

always the third form of lying (Jacques Chirac)

Torture the data long

enough and they confess anything

(Prof. Franco Zappulla, Department of Pediatric Science, Unibo)

Lesson 1
Assumptions for parametric statistical

analysis

Test of hypothesis testing

In statistics, depending on the assumptions, you can use:

Parametric tests
Can be applied in the presence of a normal distribution of data and errors. Data and errors must be independent. If the data are divided into groups, their variances should be homogeneous.

Non parametric test or

Data transformation

How to assess the normality of a distribution

1) Visually, building a frequency histogram. 2) Comparing the central values of the distribution:

mean, median, mode.

3. Evaluating the kurtosis and skewness and

dividing by their SE 4) With statistical tests (Kolmogorov-Smirnov, Shapiro Wilk) (significativity = non normality).

Normal or Gaussian curve

The histogram of frequencies

Histogram
Gruppo: Carcerati 12

10

Frequency

2 Mean = 8,82 Std. Dev. = 3,94187 N = 50 0,00 5,00 10,00 15,00 20,00

HADS_Depressione

Media, median, mode

Statistics SAL FISICA N Mean Median Mode Minimum Maximum Valid Missing 76 0 7,26 7,00 7a 1 10

In a normal distribution media = median = mode

a. Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is show n

m = media s = standard deviation

Skewness - Asimmetria
Degree of departure from symmetry in the distribution of scores. The value of skewness in the normal distribution is = zero. Positive value = many low scores. Negative value = many high scores. Limit values: 1-2 (absolute value)

Skewness < 2-3 Errore std. skewness

Kurtosis - curtosi
Degree of concentration of a distribution of scores.
The value of kurtosis in the normal distribution is = zero. Positive value = many scores around themean Negative values = many negative scores in the tails. Limit values: 1-2 (ab. v.)

Kurtosis Errore std. kurtosis

< 2-3

Skewness and kurtosis

Statisticsa HADS_Depressione N Mean Std. Error of Mean Median Std. Deviatio n Skew ness Std. Error of Skew ness Kurtosis Std. Error of Kurtosis Min imum Skewness/Std. E. = 2,84 Kurtosis /Std. E. = 0,63 Maximum a. Gruppo = Carcerati Valid Mis sin g 50 0 8,8200 ,55747 8,0000 3,94187 ,958 ,337 ,419 ,662 3,00 20,00

Statisticsa SAL FISICA N Mean Std. Error of Mean Median Mode Skew ness Std. Error of Skew ness Kurtosis Std. Error of Kurtosis Valid Mis sin g 50 0 6,88 ,287 7,00 7 -,703 ,337 ,767 ,662

Skewness/Std. E. = 2,07 a. Gruppo = Carcerati Kurtosis /Std. E. = 1,15

Normality test

b Tes ts of Nor m ality

Kolmogorov-Smirnov Statistic HADS_Depressione HADS_ansia b. Gruppo = Carcerati ,162 ,139 df 50 50

Shapiro-Wilk Statistic ,920 ,940 df 50 50 Sig. ,002 ,014 ,002 ,016

Sig.

a. Lilliefors Signif ic ance Correc tion

b Tes ts of Nor mality

Kolmogorov-Smirnov Statistic HADS_Depressione HADS_ansia b. Gruppo = Controlli ,216 ,188 df 26 26

Shapiro-Wilk Statistic ,931 ,945 df 26 26 Sig. ,084 ,175 ,003 ,018

Sig.

a. Lilliefors Significance Correction

Normality of errors (residuals)

Normality of errors (residuals)

Normality of errors (residuals)

b Tes ts of Nor mality

Kolmogorov-Smirnov Statistic Residual for HADS_ansia Residual for HADS_ Depressione b. Gruppo = Carcerati ,139 ,162 df 50 50

Shapiro-Wilk Statistic ,940 ,920 df 50 50 Sig. ,014 ,002 ,016 ,002

Sig.

a. Lilliefors Significance Correction

b Tes ts of Nor mality

Kolmogorov-Smirnov Statistic Residual for HADS_ansia Residual for HADS_ Depressione b. Gruppo = Controlli ,188 ,216 df 26 26

Shapiro-Wilk Statistic ,945 ,931 df 26 26 Sig. ,175 ,084 ,018 ,003

Sig.

a. Lilliefors Significance Correc tion

Data transformation
The logarithmic transformation to base 10 or natural base

It applies when the distribution has positive asymmetry, to obtain a normal distribution.
The transformation to the square root and cubic

It is useful to normalize distributions with positive asymmetry, and for homogenize the variances.
The mutual transformation (Y = 1 / X)

Serves to stabilize the variance.

The transformation of quadratic and cubic

It is useful when the data distribution has a strong negative asymmetry.

Example of quadratic transformation

Statisticsa HADS_ansia N Mean Std. Error of Mean Median Mode Skew ness Std. Error of Skew ness Kurtosis Std. Error of Kurtosis a. Gruppo = Carcerati Valid Missing 50 0 9,2000 ,58275 8,0000 8,00 ,850 ,337 ,487 ,662

Skewness/Std. E. = 2,52 Kurtosis /Std. E. = 0,74

The transformed variable

10 8

Histogram
Gruppo: Carcerati

Frequency

0 1,00 2,00 3,00 4,00 5,00

Mean Std. D N=5

transf_HADS_A
b Tes ts of Nor mality

Skewness/Std. E. = 0,76 Kurtosis /Std. E. = 0,05

trans f_HADS_A

Kolmogorov-Smirnov Statistic ,098 df 50

Shapiro-Wilk Statistic ,981 df 50 Sig. ,582 ,200*

Sig.

*. This is a low er bound of the true signific anc e. a. Lilliefors Significance Correc tion b. Gruppo = Carcerati

Psychometrics
Structural construct validity

Factorial analysis

Validity
"The validity of a test is the degree to which it actually measure what it intends to measure " - Garret, 1937 Structural validity
It is the degree to which the test measures a theoretical dimension or construct.

Method Factorial analysis

FACTORIAL ANALYSIS
It has its roots in the attempts of early

twentieth century by Karl Pearson and Charles Spearman to define and measure intelligence. It aims to describe the function of many observed variables in a few underlying nonobservable (latent) variables which gives the name of "factors". It is applied to analyze the correlations between variables in order to identify a latent structure. The factors are latent variables, which are the parts common to multiple observed variables (indicators or items).

FACTOR ANALYSIS
Two types:
EXPLORATIVE (EFA) Descriptive techniques Exploratory objectives No theory, it is inferred from the data the latent structure CONFERMATIVE (CFA) Relational techniques Confirmatory objectives Theory to test confirmatory application of structural equation modeling.

The exploratory factor analysis does not proceed from default assumptions; the researcher has no hypothesis to evaluate about the relationship between the variables and factors.

FACTOR ANALYSIS
EFA
Exploratory analysis of

CFA
Confirmatory analysis of

multidimensional data symmetrical method considers the variables in the same plane, two-way relationship Metrical analysis: quantitative data Linear function that binds the variables Normally distributed data.

multidimensional data asymmetrical method shows dependencies between variables (VI vs.VD) Metrical analysis: quantitative data Linear function that binds the variables Normally distributed data.

EFA
Graphically, the factors represent the amount of covariance shared by multiple indicators X2
X1, X2 e X3: indicators

F1: factor

X3

F1

X1

On a formal level, the factors are defined by analyzing the matrix of correlations between indicators. Those indicators that show high correlations with each other and lower with other indicators generate a factor.

Factor analysis applied to tests

Problem: given a set of measures, whether all measure

the same psychological variable or if they measure different aspects, identified as subgroups of measures Percentage of variance explained
TEST DIMENSIONALITY

Strength of belonging to the factor loading)(saturazione)

NUMBER OF FACTORS

Angle of rotation that makes the items as possible related to a factor and as little as possible to the others

NUMBER OF ITEMS BELONGING TO A FACTOR

ROTATION PROCEDURE

Is EFA applicable?
The model of factor analysis is not

always applicable. Assumption: Normal distribution of variables Through some indexes we can assess whether the application of the model. Is correct or not.
Determinant

Measure of adequacy for the single variable Comunality Index of Kaiser-Meyer e Olkin (KMO) Bartletts Test of sphericity

Factor/Component Extraction in EFA

Requirements/Assumptions - The instrument must have more than 5 items; - Linear interrelation among variables; - At least 100 subjects; 10 responses per Item (For reliable results); - Bartletts Test of Sphericity < .05; - Kayser Meyer Olkmin Test (KMO);
> .80 (wonderful) > .70 (median) < .60 (Unnaceptable)

EFA: descriptive analyses

Determinant

R is the variables correlation matrix.

R determinant is an useful index to see if you can

submit the correlation matrix to EFA

It must be > 0, as if it is = 0 indicates that at least

one variable is a perfect linear combination of other variables.

Adequacy for the single variable

The single variable can be subjected to factor

analysis when the correlation values are high with the other variables (p <0.05), otherwise it may also be deleted.

R correlation matrix and determinant

Correlation Matrix a
Correlation M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 M7 M8 M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 M7 M8 M1 1,000 -,195 ,113 ,272 ,136 ,559 ,073 ,120 ,000 ,011 ,000 ,003 ,000 ,068 ,007 M2 -,195 1,000 ,116 ,026 -,051 -,250 -,054 ,107 ,000 ,009 ,299 ,153 ,000 ,139 ,015 M3 ,113 ,116 1,000 ,261 ,143 ,088 -,294 ,095 ,011 ,009 ,000 ,002 ,036 ,000 ,026 M4 ,272 ,026 ,261 1,000 ,213 ,188 ,050 ,193 ,000 ,299 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,158 ,000 M5 ,136 -,051 ,143 ,213 1,000 ,235 -,052 ,132 ,003 ,153 ,002 ,000 ,000 ,147 ,004 M6 ,559 -,250 ,088 ,188 ,235 1,000 ,131 ,089 ,000 ,000 ,036 ,000 ,000 ,004 ,035 M7 ,073 -,054 -,294 ,050 -,052 ,131 1,000 ,063 ,068 ,139 ,000 ,158 ,147 ,004 ,101 M8 ,120 ,107 ,095 ,193 ,132 ,089 ,063 1,000 ,007 ,015 ,026 ,000 ,004 ,035 ,101

Sig. (1-tailed)

a. Determinant = ,396

Adequacy of a single variable

Measure sample adequacy (MSA) of a

single variable.
The values are on the main diagonal of

the anti-image correlation matrix. Values> 0.50 are adequate.

MSA
Anti-image Matrices
M1 A nti-image Covariance M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 M7 M8 ,650 ,075 -,027 -,138 ,031 -,319 ,001 -,049 M2 ,075 ,894 -,107 -,037 ,026 ,133 -,008 -,113 ,098 M3 -,027 -,107 ,812 -,188 -,050 -,048 ,271 -,036 -,037 -,125 M4 -,138 -,037 -,188 ,823 -,128 -,001 -,090 -,107 -,189 -,043 -,229 M5 ,031 ,026 -,050 -,128 ,896 -,139 ,064 -,084 ,041 ,029 -,059 -,149 M6 -,319 ,133 -,048 -,001 -,139 ,630 -,097 -,012 -,499 ,178 -,067 -,001 -,186 M7 ,001 -,008 ,271 -,090 ,064 -,097 ,869 -,063 ,001 -,010 ,322 -,107 ,073 -,131 M8 -,049 -,113 -,036 -,107 -,084 -,012 -,063 ,929 -,063 -,124 -,042 -,123 -,092 -,016 -,071

Anti-image Correlation

M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 M7 M8

,612a
,098 -,037 -,189 ,650 -,499 ,001 -,063

,637a
-,125 -,043 ,029 ,178 -,010 -,124

,543a
-,229 -,059 -,067 ,322 -,042

,654a
-,149 -,001 -,107 -,123

,679a
-,186 ,073 -,092

,596a
-,131 -,016

,459a
-,071

,671a

a. M easures of Sampling Adequacy(M SA)

Communalities
Communality: before the application of factor

analysis, each variable shows a variance explained = 1.

After the application of factor analysis, the

communalities indicate the share of variance of each variable, considering the estimated factor model.
The communalities represent the portion of the variance of

the observed variables explained by the common factor. Communality preferable value > 0.50 for all variables. Values <0.50 indicate variables that are not very appropriate for the factor solution emerged and can be removed.

Communalities

Communalities
M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 M7 M8 Initial 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 Extraction ,633 ,587 ,656 ,494 ,285 ,691 ,729 ,556

Extraction Method: PCA

Kaiser-Meyer & Olkin Index (KMO)

Goodness of fit of the model to data analysis on the correlation

matrix between variables. If the value is > 0.50 the factor model is adequate to explain the correlation between the variables. The KMO statistic indicates the proportion of variance in the variables that is common, that can be caused by latent factors.

KMO and Bartlett's Test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square df Sig. ,601 375,042 28 ,000

Bartletts test of sphericity

Evidence that the initial correlation matrix is an identity

matrix (1 on the diagonal and 0 off-diagonal). Null hypothesis (H0): R = 1.

In the identity matrix the variables are independent, so you

can not apply the factor analysis.

X1 X2 X3

X1
X2 X3

1
0 0

0
1 0

0
0 1

Bartletts test of sphericity

If the level of significance of the test is <0.05 we reject the H0, because the matrix is not identical, the variables are related, then the model can be applied.
KMO and Bartlett's Test
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square df Sig. ,601 375,042 28 ,000

p < 0,0001

SUMMARY
Indices for assessing the applicability of the factor model

Normal distributtion of variables

Determinant: >0 Measures of adequacy for single variable:

MSA > 0,50 Communality >0,50 KMO = > 0,50 Chi2, p < 0,05

Kaiser-Meyer & Olkin (KMO)

di Bartletts Test of sphericity

Different Approachs to EFA Algorithm for the extraction of factors.

Most commonly used (3 types) Principal Components Analysis (PCA - Not a Real Factor Analisys) Principal Axis Factoring (PAF - Most recommended for Non-normal distribution) Maximum Likelihood (ML - Used only when Multivariate Normal Distribution is assumed)
They Differ in How the Variances are Evaluated

Component vs Factor Analysis

Common Variance Specific Variance Error Factor

PCA Does not differentiate Common and Specific Variances (Probably Inflated Results) PAF and ML The factors are created based only on the Commom Variance (Specific and Error Excluded) A more rigorous criterion

The algorithm
To reduce the complexity while preserving most of the

variance: principal component analysis (PCA).

For analysis of concepts of theoretical

interest (constructs): maximum likelihood (ML) or principal axis factoring (PAF)

ML allows you to find a structure that represents the best fit to the observed data.

Factor Analysis vs Component Analysis

In synthesis:
... factor analysis is preferable to principal components analysis. Components analysis is only a data reduction method. It became common decades ago when computers were slow and expensive to use; it was a quicker, cheaper alternative to factor analysis
(Costello & Osbourne, 2005; Gorsuch, 1990).

if data are relatively normally distributed, maximum likelihood is the best choice. If the assumption of multivariate normality is severely violated they recommend one of the principal factor methods; in SPSS this procedure is called "principal axis factors"
(Fabrigar et al., 1999).

PCA
PCA is not a factor analysis It is used to find so many components (factors) as there are variables, for which all the variance of the variables is explained by the main components. It transform a set of variables into a smaller number of uncorrelated variables. It is a method of linear transformation of data. The factors are smaller in number of variables. The first factor (component) explains the maximum variance possible,the 2nd factor explains the maximum residual variance, etc. ...

Factors Retention
Eigenvalue Criteria Only eigenvalues higher than 1

are considered; Scree Test Eigenvalue Graphic (The curve is analyzed to determine the cut-point); A priori Criteria The researcher knows how many factors he/she would like to obtain
- Confirm pre-existent models (Researchs previously done); - Confirm a theoretical perspective;

Paralell Analysis - Monte Carlo Simulation

Eigenvalues

Eigenvalues = variance of the corresponding principal component or factor.

Kaiser criterion: extraction of factors with eige nvalue > 1, explaining a portion of variability at least equal to that of the initial variables.

Explained variance
With all the variables we can explain 100% of the variance

of the phenomenon investigated.

EFA identifies n

factors, which summarize the variables and

reduce the complexity. Factors, however, account for an amount of variance less than 100%.
The

factors

reflect

the

common

variance

among

the

indicators, but not the variance of "unique" individual indicators.

Thus, with EFA, we decide to "sacrifice" part of the variance in

favor of greater simplicity.

Explain at least 40-50% of the variance is already a good result.

Eigenvalues> 1 and explained variance

Total Variance Explained
Initial Eige nvalue s Comp onent 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Total % of Varianc e Cumulativ e % 25,441 43,731 Ex traction Sums of Squared Loadings Total 2,035 1,463 1,133 % of Varianc e 25,441 18,289 14,159 Cumulativ e % 25,441 43,731 57,890 Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings Total 1,870 1,403 1,359 % of Varianc e 23,375 17,531 16,984 Cumulativ e % 23,375 40,906 57,890

2,035 25,441 1,463 18,289 1,133 14,159

,871 ,789 ,718 ,584 ,407 10,884 9,860 8,975 7,300 5,091

57,890
68,774 78,634 87,609 94,909 100,000

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

Scree plot Cattells Scree test (1966)

It is used to determine the
Scree Plot

best number of factors to extract 1 For a good EFA, the chart should look like at the intersection of two lines. The factors to be extracted are above the peak of a change of direction of the curve. Factors (components) in the flat part of the curve explain little variance and can be excluded.
2,1 1,8 1,5

Eigenvalue

2 3

1,2

0,9

0,6

0,3

Component Number

Axes rotation
In the PCA factors are extracted in a hierarchical form (the first

factor explains most of variance, followed by the second, third, etc.).

Consequently, the first factor shows very high coefficients for all The researcher must interpret results. indicators, making it difficult to choose which ite ms to consider portions of afactor. To work around this problem, we apply the rotation axis.
Consequently, the results of factor analysis to interpret are those

of the rotated factor coefficients matrix.

Factorial Rotation

Process of data manipulation or adjustment of the factorial axis, which aims to get a simplest and more significative factorial solution.

Orthogonal (Correlation among factors not allowed)

- Varimax (Most widely used)

Oblique (Correlation among factors allowed)

- Oblimin
- Quartimin - Promax

There is no widely preferred method of oblique rotation; all tend to produce similar results and it is fine to use the default delta (0) or kappa (4) values in the software packages.
(Fabrigar et al., 1999),

Factorial Rotation
In the social sciences we generally expect some

correlation among factors. Using orthogonal rotation results in a loss of valuable information if the factors are correlated. Oblique rotation generally render a more accurate, and perhaps more reproducible, solution. If the factors are truly uncorrelated, orthogonal and oblique rotation produce nearly identical results.
(Costello & Osbourne, 2005)

Variance of rotated factors

Total Variance Explained
Initial Eige nvalue s Comp onent 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Total 2,035 1,463 1,133 ,871 ,789 ,718 ,584 ,407 % of Variance Cumulative % 25,441 43,731 Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings Total 2,035 1,463 1,133 % of Variance 25,441 18,289 14,159 Cumulative % 25,441 43,731 57,890 Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings Total 1,870 1,403 1,359 % of Variance Cumulative % 23,375 40,906

25,441 18,289 14,159

10,884 9,860 8,975 7,300 5,091

23,375 17,531 16,984

57,890
68,774 78,634 87,609 94,909 100,000

57,890

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

Loading
Through analysis of the

matrix of correlations between indicators are generated n factors.

For each indicator, with respect to each factor, is calculated a

factor loading (saturation index). The higher (in absolute value), the better the indicator is described by that factor.
Loading represents the correlation between a single item and the

factor. .
The indicators related to each other show high coefficients of

loading on the same factor.

The researcher must choose which items to consider portions of

a factor. Usually a cut

Loading
a Compone nt M atrix
a Rotated Component Matrix

Component

Component

M6 M1 M4 M5 M3 M2 M7 M8

1 ,760 ,759 ,582 ,489 ,336 ,760 ,333

2 -,310 -,218 ,309 ,212 ,686 ,553 -,576 ,264

3 -,133 ,244 -,269 ,457 ,623 ,613

M6 M1 M2 M5 M8 M4 M7 M3

1 ,824 ,775 -,586 ,824 ,312 ,139

2 ,105 ,178 ,481 ,300 ,738 ,600 ,232 ,284

,109 ,270 -,109 ,191 -,810 ,754

Ex traction Method: Principal Component Analys is. a. 3 components extrac ted.

Ex traction Method: Principal Component Analys is . Rotation Method: Varimax w ith Kaiser Normaliz ation. a. Rotation converged in 5 iterations .

Reverse score
a Rotated Component Matrix
a Rotated Com pone nt M atrix

Component

Component

M6 M1 M2 M5 M8 M4 M7 M3

1 ,824 ,775 -,586 ,824 ,312 ,139

2 ,105 ,178 ,481 ,300 ,738 ,600 ,232 ,284

3
M6 M1

2 ,105 ,178

,824 ,775 ,586 ,349

,312 -,139

,109 ,270 -,109 ,191 -,810 ,754

M2R M5 M8 M4 M7R M3

-,481 ,300 ,738 ,600

-,232 ,284

-,109 ,270 -,109 ,191

,810 ,754

Ex traction Method: Principal Component Analys is . Rotation Method: Varimax w ith Kaiser Normaliz ation. a. Rotation converged in 5 iterations .

Ex traction Method: Principal Component Analys is . Rotation Method: Varimax w ith Kaiser Normaliz ation. a. Rotation converged in 5 iterations .

Interpretation of factors
F1 F1 F3 F2 F1 F1

F3 F2

Conclusion: When to be satisfied?

The WOW criterion If, while scritinizing the factor analysis, the investigator can shout Wow, I understand these factors, the application is deemed successful. Factor analysis has a strong subjective

component and remains more an art than a science. Good advice: Search for the stability of results, including the variation of the analyzed data. Use different independent samples.