A necessary step in applying bi-factor models is to evaluate the need for domain factors with a general factor in place. The conventional null hypothesis testing (NHT) was commonly used for such a purpose. However, the conventional NHT meets challenges when the domain loadings are weak or the sample size is insufficient. This article proposes using minimal-effect testing (MET) and equivalence testing (ET) to analyze bi-factor models. A key element in conducting MET and ET is the minimal size of factor loadings that can be regarded as noteworthy in practice, termed as "minimal noteworthy size." This article presents two approaches to formulating the minimal noteworthy size and compares the pros and cons of MET, ET, and the conventional NHT. Analysis shows that MET, ET, and the conventional NHT are complementary. Combining them to test the noteworthiness of domain loadings can help researchers make a comprehensive judgment. Real and simulated datasets illustrate the applications of the three methods. Monte Carlo results show that MET and ET can control type I errors reasonably well while maintaining good statistical power.