Unidimensional factor models justify some of the most consequential summaries in science -- single scores, single ranks, and single leaderboards -- yet unidimensionality is usually assessed indirectly by fitting and evaluating models on images of the data (e.g., correlation matrices) rather than on the response matrix itself. We introduce Refactor analysis, a data-first evaluation paradigm that converts a one-factor solution into a rank-1 prediction of the original matrix by estimating both respondent- and item-side structure from dual association images. We further introduce Verifactor analysis, which evaluates the same construction under bi-cross-validated (BCV) row-column partitions for improved generalization. In simulations where the data-generating mechanism is truly rank-1 and correlational, Refactor metrics align with classical unidimensionality indices, validating the approach. However, across 200 public dichotomous datasets, traditional fit and unidimensionality measures, though highly intercorrelated, are weakly related to data recoverability, especially out of sample. This gap exposes a methodological vulnerability: excellent image-based fit can coexist with poor data-level explanatory power. Finally, treating the association measure itself as a testable hypothesis, we compare $φ$, tetrachoric, and quadrant correlation, $q^\prime$, an important reintroduction. Quadrant correlation emerges as a simple, interpretable, and remarkably robust alternative, yielding consistently stronger reconstruction and more stable behavior under sample-size variation than commonly used correlations. Together, Refactor and Verifactor shift unidimensionality assessment from "does a one-factor model fit the correlation matrix?" to the question that matters for measurement and benchmarking: does a one-factor dependence structure recover and generalize the observed responses?

翻译：暂无翻译