Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), path analysis, and structural equation modeling (SEM) have long histories in clinical research. Although CFA has largely superseded EFA, CFAs of multidimensional constructs typically fail to meet standards of good measurement: goodness of fit, measurement invariance, lack of differential item functioning, and well-differentiated factors in support of discriminant validity. Part of the problem is undue reliance on overly restrictive CFAs in which each item loads on only one factor. Exploratory SEM (ESEM), an overarching integration of the best aspects of CFA/SEM and traditional EFA, provides confirmatory tests of a priori factor structures, relations between latent factors and multigroup/multioccasion tests of full (mean structure) measurement invariance. It incorporates all combinations of CFA factors, ESEM factors, covariates, grouping/multiple-indicator multiple-cause (MIMIC) variables, latent growth, and complex structures that typically have required CFA/SEM. ESEM has broad applicability to clinical studies that are not appropriately addressed either by traditional EFA or CFA/SEM.

Interactions between (multiple indicator) latent variables are rarely used because of implementation complexity and competing strategies. Based on 4 simulation studies, the traditional constrained approach performed more poorly than did 3 new approaches--unconstrained, generalized appended product indicator, and quasi-maximum-likelihood (QML). The authors' new unconstrained approach was easiest to apply. All 4 approaches were relatively unbiased for normally distributed indicators, but the constrained and QML approaches were more biased for nonnormal data; the size and direction of the bias varied with the distribution but not with the sample size. QML had more power, but this advantage was qualified by consistently higher Type I error rates. The authors also compared general strategies for defining product indicators to represent the latent interaction factor.

NEO instruments are widely used to assess Big Five personality factors, but confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs) conducted at the item level do not support their a priori structure due, in part, to the overly restrictive CFA assumptions. We demonstrate that exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM), an integration of CFA and exploratory factor analysis (EFA), overcomes these problems with responses (N = 3,390) to the 60-item NEO-Five-Factor Inventory: (a) ESEM fits the data better and results in substantially more differentiated (less correlated) factors than does CFA; (b) tests of gender invariance with the 13-model ESEM taxonomy of full measurement invariance of factor loadings, factor variances-covariances, item uniquenesses, correlated uniquenesses, item intercepts, differential item functioning, and latent means show that women score higher on all NEO Big Five factors; (c) longitudinal analyses support measurement invariance over time and the maturity principle (decreases in Neuroticism and increases in Agreeableness, Openness, and Conscientiousness). Using ESEM, we addressed substantively important questions with broad applicability to personality research that could not be appropriately addressed with the traditional approaches of either EFA or CFA.