Invariance in measurement and prediction revisited

Psychometrika

Volumn 72, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 461-473

  Millsap, Roger E ^a  

^a ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Factorial invariance; Measurement invariance; Predictive invariance; Selection accuracy; Test bias

Indexed keywords

EID: 39149122847     PISSN: 00333123     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11336-007-9039-7     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Ackerman, T.A. (1992). A didactic explanation of item bias, item impact, and item validity from a multidimensional perspective. Journal of Educational Measurement, 29, 67-91.
2. Ahmavaara, Y. (1954). The mathematical theory of factorial invariance under selection. Psychometrika, 19, 27-38.
3. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education Joint Committee on Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington: AERA.
4. Birnbaum, M.H. (1979). Procedures for the detection and correction of salary inequities. In T.R. Pezzullo & B.E. Brittingham (Eds.), Salary equity (pp. 121-144). Lexington: Lexington Books.
5. Bloxom, B. (1972). Alternative approaches to factorial invariance. Psychometrika, 37, 425-440.
6. Borsboom, D. (2006). The attack of the psychometricians. Psychometrika, 71, 425-440.
7. Bridgeman, M.H., & Lewis, C. (1996). Gender differences in college mathematics grades and SAT-M scores: A reanalysis of Wainer and Steinberg. Journal of Educational Measurement, 33, 257-270.
8. Brown, C.H., & Liao, J. (1999). Principles for designing randomized preventive trials in mental health: An emerging developmental epidemiology paradigm. American Journal of Community Psychology, 27, 673-710.
9. Byrne, B.M. (1994). Testing for factorial validity, replication, and invariance of a measuring instrument: A paradigmatic application based on the Maslach Burnout Inventory. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 29, 289-311.
10. Clark, L.E. (2006). When a psychometric advance falls in the forest. Psychometrika, 71, 447-450.
11. Cleary, T.A. (1968). Test bias: Prediction of grades of Negro and white students in integrated colleges. Journal of Educational Measurement, 5, 115-124.
12. Drasgow, F., & Probst, T.A. (2004). The psychometrics of adaptation: Evaluating measurement equivalence across languages and cultures. In R.K. Hambleton, P.F. Merenda, & C.D. Spielberger (Eds.), Adapting educational and psychological tests for cross-cultural assessment (pp. 265-296). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.
13. Gottfredson, L.S. (1994). The science and politics of race-norming. American Psychologist, 49, 955-963.
14. Hambleton, R.K., Merenda, P.F., & Spielberger, C.D. (2006). Adapting educational and psychological tests for cross-cultural assessment. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.
15. Hartigan, J.A., & Wigdor, A.K. (1989). Fairness in employment testing: Validity generalization, minority issues, and the General Aptitude Test Battery. Washington: National Academy Press.
16. Hofer, S.M., Horn, J.L., & Eber, H.W. (1997). A robust five-factor structure of the 16PF: Strong evidence from independent rotation and confirmatory factorial invariance procedures. Personality and Individual Differences, 23, 247-269.
17. Horn, J.L., & McArdle, J.J. (1992). A practical guide to measurement invariance in research on aging. Experimental Aging Research, 18, 117-144.
18. Humphreys, L.G. (1952). Individual differences. Annual Review of Psychology, 3, 131-150.
19. Humphreys, L.G. (1986). An analysis and evaluation of test and item bias in the prediction context. Psychological Bulletin, 71, 327-333.
20. Hunter, J.E., & Schmidt, F.L. (2000). Racial and gender bias in ability and achievement tests: Resolving the apparent paradox. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 6, 151-158.
21. Jensen, A.R. (1980). Bias in mental testing. New York: Free Press.
22. Kok, F. (1988). Item bias and test multidimensionality. In R. Langeheine & J. Rost (Eds.), Latent trait and latent models (pp. 263-275). New York: Plenum.
23. Krakowski, M., & Czobor, P. (2004). Gender differences in violent behaviors: Relationship to clinical symptoms and psychosocial factors. American Journal of Psychiatry, 161, 459-465.
24. Lehmann, E.L. (1986). Testing statistical hypotheses. New York: Wiley.
25. Linn, R.L. (1984). Selection bias: Multiple meanings. Journal of Educational Measurement, 21, 33-47.
26. Linn, R.L., & Werts, C.E. (1971). Considerations for studies of test bias. Journal of Educational Measurement, 8, 1-4.
27. Lord, F.M. (1980). Applications of item response theory to practical testing problems. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.
28. Mellenbergh, G.J. (1989). Item bias and item response theory. International Journal of Educational Research, 13, 127-143.
29. Meredith, W. (1964a). Notes on factorial invariance. Psychometrika, 29, 177-185.
30. Meredith, W. (1964b). Rotation to achieve factorial invariance. Psychometrika, 29, 187-206.
31. Meredith, W. (1993). Measurement invariance, factor analysis, and factorial invariance. Psychometrika, 58, 525-543.
32. Meredith, W., & Millsap, R.E. (1992). On the misuse of manifest variables in the detection of measurement bias. Psychometrika, 57, 289-311.
33. Millsap, R.E. (1995). Measurement invariance, predictive invariance, and the duality paradox. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 30, 577-605.
34. Millsap, R.E. (1997). Invariance in measurement and prediction: Their relationship in the single-factor case. Psychological Methods, 2, 248-260.
35. Millsap, R.E. (1998). Group differences in regression intercepts: Implications for factorial invariance. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 33, 403-424.
36. Millsap, R.E., & Hartog, S.B. (1988). Alpha, beta, and gamma change in evaluation research: A structural equation approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 574-584.
37. Millsap, R.E., & Kwok, O.M. (2004). Evaluating the impact of partial factorial invariance on selection in two populations. Psychological Methods, 9, 93-115.
38. Millsap, R.E., & Meredith, W. (1992). Inferential conditions in the statistical detection of measurement bias. Applied Psychological Measurement, 16, 389-402.
39. Neisser, U., Boodoo, G., Bourchard, T.J., Boykin, A.W., Brody, N., Ceci, S.J., Halpern, D.F., Loehlin, J.C., Perloff, R., Sternberg, R.J., & Urbina, S. (1996). Intelligence: Knowns and unknowns. American Psychologist, 51, 77-101.
40. Pentz, M.A., & Chou, C. (1994). Measurement invariance in longitudinal clinical research assuming change from development and intervention. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 62, 450-462.
41. Potthoff, R.F. (1966). Statistical aspects of the problem of biases in psychological tests (Institute of Statistics Mimeo Series No. 479). Chapel Hill, NC: Department of Statistics, University of North Carolina.
42. Riordan, C.R., Richardson, H.A., Schaffer, B.S., & Vandenberg, R.J. (2001). Alpha, beta, and gamma change: A review of past research with recommendations for new directions. In L.L. Neider & C. Schriesheim (Eds.), Equivalence in measurement (pp. 51-98). Greenwich: Information Age Publishing.
43. Sackett, P.R., & Wilk, S.L. (1994). Within-group norming and other forms of score adjustment in preemployment testing. American Psychologist, 49, 929-954.
44. Sackett, P.R., Schmitt, N., Ellington, J.E., & Kabin, M.B. (2001). High-stakes testing in employment, credentialing, and higher education: Prospects in a post-affirmative action world. American Psychologist, 56, 302-318.
45. Schmidt, F.L., & Hunter, J.E. (1998). The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: Practical and theoretical implications of over 85 years of research findings. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 262-274.
46. Schmidt, F.L., Pearlman, K., & Hunter, J.E. (1980). The validity and fairness of employment and educational tests for Hispanic Americans: A review and analysis. Personnel Psychology, 33, 705-724.
47. Shealy, R., & Stout, W. (1993). A model-based standardization approach that separates true bias/DIF from group ability differences and detects test bias/DTF as well as item bias/DIF. Psychometrika, 58, 159-194.
48. Society for Industrial/Organizational Psychology (2003). Principles for the application and use of personnel selection procedures. Bowling Green: Society for Industrial Organizational Psychology.
49. Stout, W. (1990). A new item response theory modeling approach with applications to unidimensionality assessment and ability estimation. Psychometrika, 55, 293-325.
50. Thissen, D., Steinberg, L., & Wainer, H. (1988). Use of item response theory in the study of group differences in trace lines. In H. Wainer & H.I. Braun (Eds.), Test validity (pp. 147-169). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.
51. Thomson, G.H., & Lederman, W. (1939). The influence of multivariate selection on the factorial analysis of ability. British Journal of Psychology, 29, 288-305.
52. Thurstone, L.L. (1947). Multiple factor analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
53. Zwick, R. (1990). When do item response function and Mantel-Haenszel definitions of differential item functioning coincide? Journal of Educational Statistics, 15, 185-197.
54. Zwick, R. (1990). When do item response function and Mantel-Haenszel definitions of differential item functioning coincide? Journal of Educational Statistics, 15, 185-197.