{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020385050962627407, 'fraction_numerical': 0.009060022650056626, 'mean_word_length': 5.225352112676056, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Hierarchical Models of Attitude.

Although the philosophy of science literature argues that a distinction should be made between different levels of abstraction, it is only recently that such models have been developed and estimated by researchers in the social sciences. Estimation of such hierarchical models, which was not possible earlier, is made easier by the work of Bentler and Weeks (1979) and Joreskog and Sorbom (1981). This paper illustrates the application and use of hierarchical models using the structure of attitude as an example. Hierarchical models of attitude showed considerably better fit and interpretable results than the non-hierarchical model. Such models also appear to be a better way to conceptualize and estimate models in the presence of collinear constructs. Caution should be exercised, however, as higher-order models may not be uniquely determined.