Determining the Number of Components from the Matrix of Partial Correlations | Psychometrika | Cambridge Core (original) (raw)

Abstract

A common problem for both principal component analysis and image component analysis is determining how many components to retain. A number of solutions have been proposed, none of which is totally satisfactory. An alternative solution which employs a matrix of partial correlations is considered. No components are extracted after the average squared partial correlation reaches a minimum. This approach gives an exact stopping point, has a direct operational interpretation, and can be applied to any type of component analysis. The method is most appropriate when component analysis is employed as an alternative to, or a first-stage solution for, factor analysis.

References

Howe, W. G. Some contributions to factor analysis (Report No. ONRL-1919), 1955, Oak Ridge, Tenn.: Oak Ridge National Laboratory.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bartlett, M. S. Tests of significance in factor analysis. The British Journal of Psychology, 1950, 3, 77–85.Google Scholar

Bartlett, M. S. A further note on tests of significance in factor analysis. The British Journal of Psychology, 1951, 4, 1–2.Google Scholar

Bechtoldt, H. P. An empirical study of the factor analysis stability hypothesis. Psychometrika, 1961, 26, 405–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Emmett, W. C. Factor analysis by Lawley's method of maximum likelihood. British Journal of Psychology, Statistical Section, 1949, 2, 90–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gorsuch, R. L. Using Bartlett's significance test to determine the number of factors to extract. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1973, 33, 361–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Harman, H. H. Modern factor analysis, 1960, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Harman, H. H., & Jones, W. H. Factor analysis by minimizing residuals (minres). Psychometrika, 1966, 31, 351–368.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Horst, P. Factor analysis of data matrices, 1965, New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.Google Scholar

Jöreskog, K. G. Some contributions to maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 1967, 32, 443–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kaiser, H. F. The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1960, 20, 141–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lord, F. M. A study of speed factors in tests and academic grades. Psychometrika, 1956, 21, 31–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Maxwell, E. A. Recent trends in factor analysis. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 1961, 124, 49–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schönemann, P. H., & Wang, M. Some new results on factor indeterminacy. Psychometrika, 1972, 37, 61–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Van de Geer, J. P. Introduction to multivariate analysis for the social sciences, 1971, San Francisco: Freeman.Google Scholar

Velicer, W. F. An empirical comparison of the stability of factor analysis, principal component analysis, and image analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1974, 34, 563–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Velicer, W. F. The relation between factor score estimates, image scores, and principal component scores. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1976, 36, 149–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Velicer, W. F. An empirical comparison of the similarity of principal component, image, and factor patterns. Multivariate Behavioral Research, in press.Google Scholar