Abstract
Hyperplane fitting factor rotations perform better than conventional rotations in attaining simple structure for complex configurations. Hyperplane rotations are reviewed and then compared using familiar examples from the literature selected to vary in complexity. Included is a new method for fitting hyperplanes, hypermax, which updates the work of Horst (1941) and Deringer and Kaiser (1989). Hypercon, a method for confirmatory target rotation, is a natural extension. These performed very well when compared with selected hyperplane and conventional rotations. The concluding sections consider the pros and cons of each method.
Full Text 
Sign-in/Register to access full text options
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Published version (
Free)
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
