150765-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
The purpose of this study was to examine under which conditions "good" data characteristics can compensate for "poor" characteristics in Latent Class Analysis (LCA), as well as to set forth guidelines regarding the minimum sample size and ideal number and

The purpose of this study was to examine under which conditions "good" data characteristics can compensate for "poor" characteristics in Latent Class Analysis (LCA), as well as to set forth guidelines regarding the minimum sample size and ideal number and quality of indicators. In particular, we studied to which extent including a larger number of high quality indicators can compensate for a small sample size in LCA. The results suggest that in general, larger sample size, more indicators, higher quality of indicators, and a larger covariate effect correspond to more converged and proper replications, as well as fewer boundary estimates and less parameter bias. Based on the results, it is not recommended to use LCA with sample sizes lower than N = 100, and to use many high quality indicators and at least one strong covariate when using sample sizes less than N = 500.
Reuse Permissions


  • Download restricted.

    Details

    Title
    • Testing the limits of latent class analysis
    Contributors
    Date Created
    2012
    Resource Type
  • Text
  • Collections this item is in
    Note
    • thesis
      Partial requirement for: M.A., Arizona State University, 2012
    • bibliography
      Includes bibliographical references (p. 54-56)
    • Field of study: Psychology

    Citation and reuse

    Statement of Responsibility

    by Ingrid Carlson Wurpts

    Machine-readable links