st: Interpreting proportion of variance explained in EFA

["Adrianna Murphy" <Adrianna.Murphy@lshtm.ac.uk>]

Hello,
I'm new to exploratory factor analysis and am confused about the results I'm getting, specifically the proportion of variance explained by the first factor (i.e. it is greater than 1). Below is my output. Previous threads have suggested adding altdivisor - when I try this I get a proportion explained of 0.40 (and the cumulative proportions do not add to 1). Is that the way to get the number I'm looking for?
Secondly, I've read/heard conflicting opinions on whether or not it is 'correct' to include dichotomous variables with continuous ones in EFA. Any authoritative opinions on this would be much appreciated.
Thank you,
Adrianna




Factor analysis/correlation                        Number of obs    =     1790
    Method: principal factors                      Retained factors =        1
    Rotation: (unrotated)                          Number of params =        6


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Factor  |   Eigenvalue   Difference        Proportion   Cumulative
    -------------+------------------------------------------------------------
        Factor1  |      2.39160      2.16477            1.0738       1.0738
        Factor2  |      0.22684      0.22360            0.1018       1.1757
        Factor3  |      0.00324      0.06245            0.0015       1.1771
        Factor4  |     -0.05922      0.09220           -0.0266       1.1505
        Factor5  |     -0.15141      0.03242           -0.0680       1.0825
        Factor6  |     -0.18383            .                 -0.0825       1.0000
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------
    LR test: independent vs. saturated:  chi2(15) = 3369.90 Prob>chi2 = 0.0000







*
*   For searches and help try:
*   http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
*   http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/resources/statalist-faq/
*   http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/