Do self-report instruments allow meaningful comparisons across diverse population groups? Testing measurement invariance using the confirmatory factor analysis framework

Medical Care

Volumn 44, Issue 11 SUPPL. 3, 2006, Pages

  Gregorich, Steven E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Confirmatory factor analysis; Factorial invariance; Measurement invariance; Metric invariance; Scalar invariance; Strict factorial invariance

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CULTURAL FACTOR; EPIDEMIOLOGY; ETHNIC GROUP; FACTORIAL ANALYSIS; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; METHODOLOGY; PSYCHOMETRY; STATISTICAL MODEL; STATISTICS;

BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); CROSS-CULTURAL COMPARISON; DATA COLLECTION; ETHNIC GROUPS; FACTOR ANALYSIS, STATISTICAL; HUMANS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; PSYCHOMETRICS;

EID: 33750339928     PISSN: 00257079     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000245454.12228.8f     Document Type: Article

References (66)

1. Little TD. Mean and covariance structures (MACS) analyses of cross-cultural data: practical and theoretical issues. Multivariate Behav Res. 1997;32:53-76.
2. Meredith W. Measurement invariance, factor analysis and factorial invariance. Psychometrika. 1993;58:525-543.
3. Millsap RE. Group differences in regression intercepts: implications for factorial invariance. Multivariate Behav Res. 1998;33:403-424.
4. Yoo B. Cross-group comparisons: a cautionary note. Psychology and Marketing. 2002;19:357-368.
5. Nunnally JC. Psychometric Theory. New York: McGraw Hill; 1978.
6. Gorsuch RL. Factor Analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1983.
7. McDonald RP. Test Theory: A Unified Treatment. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1999.
8. Bollen KA. Structural Equations With Latent Variables. New York: John Wiley and Sons; 1989.
9. Cheung GW, Rensvold RB. Assessing extreme and acquiescence response sets in cross-cultural research using structural equations modeling. J Cross Cult Psychol. 2000;31:187-212.
10. Jöreskog KG. Simultaneous factor analysis in several populations. Psychometrika. 1971;36:409-426.
11. Little TD. On the comparability of constructs in cross-cultural research: a critique of Cheung and Rensvold. J Cross Cult Psychol. 2000;31:213-219.
12. Meredith W, Teresi JA. An essay on measurement and factorial invariance. Med Care. 2006;44(Suppl 3):S69-S77.
13. Sörbom D. A general method for studying differences in factor mean and factor structures between groups. Br J Math Stat Psychol. 1974;27:229-239.
14. Sörbom D. Structural equation models with structured means. In: Jöreskog KG, Wold H, eds. Systems Under Indirect Observation: Causality, Structure, and Prediction. Amsterdam: North Holland; 1982:183-195.
15. Steenkamp J-BEM, Baumgartner H. Assessing measurement invariance in cross-national consumer research. J Consum Res. 1998;25:78-90.
16. Byrne BM, Shavelson RJ, Muthén B. Testing for the equivalence of factor covariance and mean structures: the issue of partial measurement invariance. Psychol Bull. 1989;105:456-466.
17. Cheung GW, Rensvold RB. Testing factorial invariance across groups: a reconceptualization and proposed new method. J Manage. 1999;25:1-27.
18. Horn JL, McArdle JJ. A practical and theoretical guide to measurement invariance in aging research. Exp Aging Res. 1992;18:117-144.
19. Vandenberg RJ, Lance CE. A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organ Res Methods. 2000;2:4-69.
20. Dolan CV. Investigating Spearman's hypothesis by means of multi-group confirmatory factor analysis. Multivariate Behav Res. 2000;35:21-50.
21. Hofer SM, Horn JL, Eber HW. A robust five-factor structure of the 16PF: strong evidence from independent rotation and confirmatory factorial invariance procedures. Pers Individ Dif. 1997;23:247-269.
22. Hong S, Malik ML, Lee MK. Testing configural, metric, scalar, and latent mean invariance across genders in sociotropy and autonomy using a non-Western sample. Educ Psychol Meas. 2003;63:636-654.
23. Kossowska M, Van Heil A, Chun WYK, et al. The need for cognitive closure scale: structure, cross-cultural invariance, and comparison of mean ratings between European-American and East Asian samples. Psychol Belg. 2002;42:267-286.
24. Marin BV, Tschann JM, Gómez CA, et al. Self-efficacy to use condoms in unmarried Latino adults. Am J Community Psychol. 1998;26:53-71.
25. Munet-Vilaró F, Gregorich SE, Folkman S. Factor structure of the Spanish version of the ways of coping questionnaire. J Appl Soc Psychol. 2002;32:1938-1954.
26. Pomplun M, Omar MH. The factorial invariance of a test of reading comprehension across groups of limited English proficiency students. Appl Meas Educ. 2001;14:261-283.
27. Shevlin M, Brunsden V, Miles JNV. Satisfaction with life scale: analysis of factorial invariance, mean structures, and reliability. Pers Individ Dif. 1998;25:911-916.
28. Whiteside-Mansell L, Corwyn RF. Mean and covariance structures analyses: an examination of the Rosenberg self-esteem scale among adolescents and adults. Educ Psychol Meas. 2003;63:163-173.
29. Bollen KA. Latent variables in psychology and the social sciences. Annu Rev Psychol. 2002;53:605-634.
30. Sobel ME. Causal inference in latent variable models. In: von Eye A, Clogg CC, eds. Latent Variables Analysis: Applications for Developmental Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1994:3-35.
31. Borsboom D, Mellenbergh GJ, Van Heerden J. The theoretical status of latent variables. Psychol Rev. 2003;110:203-219.
32. Bentler PM, Weeks DG. Interrelations among models for the analysis of moment structures. Multivariate Behav Res. 1979;14:169-185.
33. Bentler PM, Weeks DG. Linear structural equations with latent variables. Psychometrika. 1980;45:289-308.
34. Jöreskog KG. A general approach to confirmatory maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika. 1969;34:183-202.
35. MacCallum RC. Model specification: procedures, strategies, and related issues. In: Hoyle RH, ed. Structural Equation Modeling: Concepts, Issues, and Applications. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1995.
36. Meredith W, Horn J. The role of factorial invariance in modeling growth and change. In: Collins LM, Sayer AG, eds. New Methods for the Analysis of Change. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2001.
37. Cattell RB. The screen test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behav Res. 1966;1:245-276.
38. Guttman L. Some necessary conditions for common factor analysis. Psychometrika. 1954;19:149-161.
39. Jöreskog KG. On the statistical treatment of residuals in factor analysis. Psychometrika. 1962;27:335-354.
40. Jöreskog KG. Some contributions to maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika. 1967;32:443-482.
41. Lawley DN. The estimation of factor loadings by the method of maximum likelihood. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh. 1940:64-82.
42. Lawley DN, Maxwell AE. Factor Analysis as a Statistical Method. London: Butterworth; 1963.
43. Mulaik SA. The Foundations of Factor Analysis. New York: McGraw Hill; 1972.
44. Jöreskog KG. A general approach to confirmatory maximum likelihood factor analysis with addendum. In: Jöreskog K, Sörbom D, Magidson J, eds. Advances in Factor Analysis and Structural Equation Models. Cambridge, MA: Abt Books; 1979:21-43.
45. Baumgartner H, Steenkamp J-BEM. Response styles in marketing research: a cross-national investigation. J Mark Res. 2001;38:143-156.
46. Meredith W. Notes on factorial invariance. Psychometrika. 1964;29:177-185.
47. Meredith W. Two wrongs may not make a right. Multivariate Behav Res. 1995;30:89-94.
48. Radloff LS. The CES-D scale: a self-report depression scale for research in the general populations. Appl Psych Meas. 1977;1:385-401.
49. Cornoni-Huntley J, Barbano HE, Brody JA, et al. National health and nutrition examination, I: epidemiologic followup survey. Public Health Rep. 1983;98:245-251.
50. Madans JH, Kleinman JC, Cox CS, et al. 10 years after NHANES I: report of initial followup, 1982-84. Public Health Rep. 1986;101:465-473.
51. Jöreskog KG, Sörbom D. Chicago: Scientific Software International; 2003.
52. Muthén BO, Kaplan D. A comparison of some methodologies for the factor analysis of non-normal Likert variables. Br J Math Stat Psychol. 1985;38:171-189.
53. Muthén BO, Kaplan D. A comparison of some methodologies for the factor analysis of non-normal Likert variables: a note on the size of the model. Br J Math Stat Psychol. 1992;45:19-30.
54. Curran PJ, West SG, Finch JF. The robustness of test statistics to nonnormality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis. Psychol Methods. 1996;1:16-29.
55. Satorra A, Bentler PM. Corrections to test statistics and standard errors in covariance structure analysis. In: von Eye A, Clogg CC, eds. Latent Variables Analysis: Applications for Developmental Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 1994:399-419.
56. Muthén BO, Satorra A. Complex sample data in structural equation modeling. Sociol Methodol. 1995;25:267-316.
57. Satorra A, Bentler PM. A scaled difference chi-square test statistic for moment structure analysis. Psychometrika. 2001;66:507-514.
58. Steiger JH, Lind JM. Statistically Based Tests for the Number of Common Factors. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Psychometric Society; Iowa City, IA; 1980.
59. Browne MW, Cudeck R. Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In: Bollen KA, Long JS, eds. Testing Structural Equation Models. Newbury Park, CA: Sage; 1993:136-162.
60. Bentler PM. Comparative fit indices in structural models. Psychol Bull. 1990;107:238-246.
61. Hu LT, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. SEM. 1999;6:1-55.
62. Millsap RE, Kwok OM. Evaluating the impact of partial factorial invariance on selection in two populations. Psychol Methods. 2004;9:93-115.
63. Muthén LK, Muthén B. Mplus User's Guide. Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén; 2001.
64. Cliff N. Some cautions concerning the application of causal modeling methods. Multivariate Behav Res. 1983;18:81-105.
65. MacCallum R. Specification searches in covariance structure modeling. Psychol Bull. 1986;100:107-120.
66. Allen MJ, Yen WM. Introduction to Measurement Theory. Monterey, CA: Brooks & Cole; 1979.