Testing measurement invariance: A comparison of multiple-group categorical CFA and IRT

Structural Equation Modeling

Volumn 18, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 212-228

  Kim, Eun Sook ^a   Yoon, Myeongsun ^a  

^a TEXAS A AND M UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Categorical analysis; CFA (confirmatory factor analysis); DIF (differential item functioning); IRT (item response theory); Measurement invariance

Indexed keywords

EID: 79957805529     PISSN: 10705511     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10705511.2011.557337     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. O. (2006). Robust chi square difference testing with mean and variance adjusted test statistics (Mplus Web Notes No. 10). Retrieved from http://www.statmodel.com/download/webnotes/webnote10.pdf
2. Bock, R. D., & Aitkin, M. (1981). Marginal maximum likelihood estimation of item parameters. Psychometrika, 46, 443-459.
3. Borsboom, D. (2006). When does measurement invariance matter? Medical Care, 44(11), S176-S181.
4. duToit, M. (2003). IRT from SSI: BILOG_MG, MULTILOG, PARSCALE, TESTFACT. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International.
5. Finch, W. H. (2005). The MIMIC model as a method for detecting DIF: Comparison with Mantel-Haenszel, SIBTEST, and the IRT likelihood ratio. Applied Psychological Measurement, 29(4), 278-295.
6. Fleishman, J. A., Spector, W. D., & Altman, B. M. (2002). Impact of differential item functioning on age and gender differences in functional disability. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 57B(5), S275-S284.
7. French, B. F., & Finch, W. H. (2008). Multiple group confirmatory factor analysis: Locating the invariant referent sets. Structural Equation Modeling, 15, 96-113.
8. Gallo, J. J., Anthony, J. C., & Muthén, B. O. (1994). Age differences in the symptoms of depression: A latent trait analysis. Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences, 49, P251-P264.
9. Glockner-Rist, A., & Hoijtink, H. (2003). The best of both worlds: Factor analysis of dichotomous data using item response theory and structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 10, 544-565.
10. Green, S. B., Thompson, M. S., & Poirer, J. (2001). An adjusted Bonferroni method for elimination of parameters in specification addition searches. Structural Equation Modeling, 8, 18-39.
11. Hambleton, R. K., Swaminathan, H., & Rogers, H. J. (1991). Fundamentals of item response theory. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
12. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55.
13. Kamata, A., & Bauer, D. J. (2008). A note on the relation between factor analytic and item response theory models. Structural Equation Modeling, 15(1), 136-153.
14. Kim, S.-H., & Cohen, A. S. (1995). A comparison of Lord's chi-square, Raju's area measures, and the likelihood ratio test on detection of differential item functioning. Applied Measurement in Education, 8, 291-312.
15. Lord, F. M., & Novick, M. E. (1968). Statistical theories of mental test scores. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
16. McDonald, R. P. (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
17. Meade, A. W., & Lautenschlager, G. J. (2004). A comparison of item response theory and confirmatory factor analytic methodologies for establishing measurement equivalence/invariance. Organizational Research Methods, 7(4), 361-388.
18. Mellenbergh, G. J. (1989). Item bias and item response theory. International Journal of Educational Research, 13, 127-143.
19. Meredith, W. (1993). Measurement invariance, factor analysis and factorial invariance. Psychometrika, 58(4), 525-543.
20. Meredith, W., & Teresi, J. A. (2006). An essay on measurement and factorial invariance. Medical Care, 44(11), S69-S77.
21. Millsap, R. E., & Everson, H. T. (1993). Methodology review: Statistical approaches for assessing measurement bias. Applied Psychological Measurement, 17(4), 297-334.
22. Millsap, R. E., & Kwok, O-M. (2004). Evaluating the impact of partial factorial invariance on selection in two populations. Psychological Methods, 9(1), 93-115.
23. Millsap, R. E., & Yun-Tein, J. (2004). Assessing factorial invariance in ordered-categorical measures. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39(3), 479-515.
24. Muthén, B. O. (2002). Beyond SEM: General latent variable modeling. Behaviormetrika, 29(1), 81-117.
25. Muthén, B. O., & Asparouhov, T. (2002). Latent variable analysis with categorical outcomes: Multiple-group and growth modeling in Mplus (MplusWeb Notes No. 4). Retrieved from http://www.statmodel.com/download/webnotes/CatMGLong.pdf
26. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998-2008). Mplus user's guide (5th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
27. Oishi, S. (2006). The concept of life satisfaction across cultures: An IRT analysis. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 411-423.
28. Oort, F. J. (1998). Simulation study of item bias detection with restricted factor analysis. Structural Equation Modeling, 5, 107-124.
29. Raju, N. S. (1988). The area between two item characteristic curves. Psychometrika, 53, 495-502.
30. Raju, N. S., Laffitte, L. J., & Byrne, B. M. (2002). Measurement equivalence: A comparison of methods based on confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3), 517-529.
31. Reise, S. P., Widaman, K. F., & Pugh, R. H. (1993). Confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory: Two approaches for exploring measurement invariance. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 552-566.
32. Samejima, F. (1969). Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores. Psychometrika, 34(4, Pt. 2), 1-100.
33. Stark, S., Chernyshenko, O. S., & Drasgow, F. (2006). Detecting differential item functioning with confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory: Toward a unified strategy. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(6), 1292-1306.
34. Takane, Y., & de Leeuw, J. (1987). On the relationship between item response theory and factor analysis of discretized variables. Psychometrika, 52(3), 393-408.
35. Thissen, D. (2001). IRTLRDIF v.2.0b: Software for the computation of the statistics involved in item response theory likelihood-ratio test for differential item functioning. Chapel Hill, NC: L. L. Thurstone Psychometric Laboratory.
36. 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. Braun (Eds.), Test validity (pp. 147-169). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
37. Thissen, D., Steinberg, L., & Wainer, H. (1993). Detection of differential item functioning using the parameters of item response models. In P. W. Holland & H. Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning (pp. 67-113). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
38. Thompson, M. S., & Green, S. B. (2006). Evaluating between-group differences in latent variable means. In G. R. Hancock & R. O. Mueller (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: A second course (pp. 119-169). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
39. Wirth, R. J., & Edwards, M. C. (2007). Item factor analysis: Current approaches and future directions. Psychological Methods, 12, 58-79.
40. Yoon, M. (2008). Statistical power in testing factorial invariance with ordinal measures. Dissertation Abstracts International, 68(11), 7705B. (UMI No. 3288042)
41. Yoon, M., & Millsap, R. E. (2007). Detecting violations of factorial invariance using data-based specification searches: A Monte Carlo study. Structural Equation Modeling, 14, 435-463.
42. Yu, C. Y. (2002). Evaluating cutoff criteria of model fit indices for latent variable models with binary and continuous outcomes (Pub. No. AAT 3066425). Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles, CA.