Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-06T02:19:42.688Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Comparison of Factor Analysis Programs in SPSS, BMDP, and SAS

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

Robert MacCallum
Robert MacCallum*
Affiliation:
Ohio State University
*
Reprint requests should be addressed to Robert MacCallum, Ohio State University, Department of Psychology, 404 C West 17th Street, Columbus, Ohio 43210.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Factor analysis programs in SAS, BMDP, and SPSS are discussed and compared in terms of documentation, methods and options available, internal logic, computational accuracy, and results provided. Some problems with respect to logic and output are described. Based on these comparisons, recommendations are offered which include a clear overall preference for SAS, and advice against general use of SPSS for factor analysis.

Keywords

computer program packagesfactor analysis
Type
Original Paper
Information
Psychometrika , Volume 48 , Issue 2 , June 1983 , pp. 223 - 231
Copyright
Copyright © 1983 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.)

Footnotes

Note to readers: This is the first example of a new type of paper for Psychometrika, evaluative descriptions of widely distributed programs. (Ed.).

References

Armstrong, J. S. Derivation of theory by means of factor analysis or Tom Swift and his electric factor analysis machine. The American Statistician, 1967, 17–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 1980, 88, 588–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dixon, W. J. BMDP Statistical Software—1981, Berkeley, California: University of California Press, 1981.Google Scholar
Guttman, L. Some necessary conditions for common factor analysis. Psychometrika, 1954, 19, 149–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harman, H. H. Modern factor analysis, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1967.Google Scholar
Harris, C. W. Some Rao-Guttman relationships. Psychometrika, 1962, 27, 247–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, C. W., & Kaiser, H. F. Oblique factor analytic solutions by orthogonal transformations. Psychometrika, 1964, 29, 347–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helwig, J. T., & Council, K. A. SAS User's Guide: 1979 edition, Raleigh, N.C.: SAS Institute, Inc., 1979.Google Scholar
Hendrickson, A. E., & White, P. O. Promax: A quick method for rotation to oblique simple structure. British Journal of Statistical Psychology, 1964, 17, 65–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hornik, J. Quantitative analysis of visual perception of printed advertisements. Journal of Advertising Research, 1980, 20, 41–48.Google Scholar
Hull, C. H., & Nie, N. H. SPSS Update 7–9, New York: McGraw-Hill, 1981.Google Scholar
Jennrich, R. I., & Sampson, P. F. Rotation for simple loadings. Psychometrika, 1966, 31, 313–323.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaiser, H. F. A second generation Little Jiffy. Psychometrika, 1970, 35, 401–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDonald, R. P., & Burr, E. J. A comparison of four methods of constructing factor scores. Psychometrika, 1967, 32, 381–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montanelli, R. G., & Humphreys, L. Latent roots of random data correlation matrices with squared multiple correlations on the diagonal: A Monte Carlo study. Psychometrika, 1976, 41, 341–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mulaik, S. A. The foundations of factor analysis, New York: McGraw-Hill, 1972.Google Scholar
Nie, N. H., Hull, C. H., Jenkins, J. G., Steinbrenner, K., & Bent, D. H. SPSS Statistical Package for the Social Sciences, New York: McGraw-Hill, 1975.Google Scholar
SAS Institute Inc.. SAS User's Guide: Statistics 1982 Edition, Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc., 1982.Google Scholar
Tucker, L. R Relations of factor score estimates to their use. Psychometrika, 1971, 36, 427–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tucker, L. R, Koopman, R. F., & Linn, R. L. Evaluation of factor analytic research procedures by means of simulated correlation matrices. Psychometrika, 1969, 34, 421–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tucker, L. R, & Lewis, C. A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 1973, 38, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar