[R] factor analysis - discrepancy in results from R vs. Stata

[Prof Brian Ripley]

I don't believe promax is uniquely defined.  Not only are there 
differences in the criterion (R allows a choice), it is an optimization 
problem with multiple local optima.

In fact the same is true of factanal, and the first thing to check would 
be to see if the same FA solution has been found.

On Fri, 19 May 2006, Ricardo Pietrobon wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I found a discrepancy between results in R and Stata for a factor analysis
> with a promax rotation.  For Stata:

[...]

> This is just one example -- all other comparisons with a different number of
> factors, with and without rotation, generated different numbers.  Any
> thoughts from the list members on the reasons for the discrepancy?
>
> thanks,
>
>
> Ricardo Pietrobon, MD, PhD
> Duke University Health System
>
> 	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]

PLEASE don't send HTML code but properly formatted ASCII text.

-- 
Brian D. Ripley,                  ripley at stats.ox.ac.uk
Professor of Applied Statistics,  http://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/~ripley/
University of Oxford,             Tel:  +44 1865 272861 (self)
1 South Parks Road,                     +44 1865 272866 (PA)
Oxford OX1 3TG, UK                Fax:  +44 1865 272595