Measurement invariance across face-to-face and telephone modes: The case of minority-status collectivistic-oriented groups

International Journal of Public Opinion Research

Volumn 24, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 185-207

  Gordoni, Galit ^a   Schmidt, Peter ^b,c   Gordoni, Yiftach ^d  

^a TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY   (Israel)

^b JUSTUS LIEBIG UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^c PHILIPPS UNIVERSITY MARBURG   (Germany)

^d UNIVERSITY OF HAIFA   (Israel)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84862166871     PISSN: 09542892     EISSN: 14716909     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/ijpor/edq054     Document Type: Article

References (64)

1. The American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR)(5th ed). Lenexa, KS: AAPOR. Retrieved from, 2008,Standard Definitions: Final Dispositions of Case Codes and Outcome Rates for Surveys,http://www.aapor.org/uploads/ Standard-Definitions-07-08-Final.pdf.
2. Akaike, H. (1987). Factor analysis and AIC. Psychometrika, 52(3), 317-332.
3. Aquilino, W. S. (1994). Interview mode effects in surveys of drug and alcohol use: A field experiment. Public Opinion Quarterly, 58(2), 210-240.
4. Aquilino, W. S., &Lo Sciuto, L. A. (1990). Effects of interview mode on selfreported drug use. Public Opinion Quarterly, 54(3), 362-395.
5. Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 238-246.
6. Bentler, P. M. (2005). EQS 6 structural equations program manual. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software.
7. Bentler, P. M., &Wu, E. J. C. (2005). EQS for windows user's guide (version 6.1). Encino, CA: Multivariate Software.
8. Biemer, P. P. (1988). Measuring data quality. In R. M. Groves, P. P. Biemer, L. E. Lyberg, J. T. Massey, W. L. Nicholls &J. Waksberg (Eds.), Telephone survey methodology (pp. 273-282). New York: Wiley.
9. Blalock, H. M. (1968). The measurement problem: A gap between the languages of theory and research. In H. M. Blalock &A. B. Blalock (Eds.), Methodology in social research. New York: McGraw-Hill.
10. Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley.
11. Bollen, K. A. (2002). Latent variables in psychology and the social sciences. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 605-634.
12. Browne, M. W., &Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative methods of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods and Research, 21, 230-258.
13. Byrne, B. M. (2006). Structural equation modeling with EQS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
14. Byrne, B. M., Shavelson, R. J., &Muthén, B. (1989). Testing for the equivalence of factor covariance and mean structures: The issue of partial measurement invariance. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 456-466.
15. Byrne, B. M., &Stewart, S. M. (2006). The MACS approach to testing for multigroup invariance of a second-order structure: A walk through the process. Structural Equation Modeling, 13, 287-321.
16. Carmines, E. G., &Zeller, R. A. (1979). Reliability and validity assessment. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
17. Chen, F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indices to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 14, 464-504.
18. Cole, M. S., Bedeian, A. G., &Feild, H. S. (2006). The measurement equivalence of web-based and paper-and-pencil measures of transformational leadership: A multinational test. Organizational Research Methods, 9(3), 339-368.
19. Cronbach, L. J. (1950). Further evidence on response sets and test design. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 10(1), 3-31.
20. Davidov, E. (2009). Measurement equivalence of nationalism and constructive patriotism in the ISSP: 34 countries in a comparative perspective. Political Analysis, 17(1), 64-82.
21. Davidov, E., &Depner, F. (2009). Testing for measurement equivalence of human values across online and paper-and-pencil surveys. Quality and Quantity, 45(2), 375-390.
22. de Leeuw, E. D. (1992). Data quality in mail, telephone and face to face surveys. Amsterdam: TT Publikaties.
23. de Leeuw, E. D. (2005). To mix or not to mix data collection modes in surveys. Journal of Official Statistics, 21(2), 233-255.
24. de Leeuw, E. D., &van der Zouwen, J. (1988). Data quality in telephone and face to face surveys: A comparative meta-analysis. In R. M. Groves, P. P. Biemer, L. E. Lyberg, J. T. Massey, W. L. Nicholls &J. Waksberg (Eds.), Telephone survey methodology (pp. 283-299). New York: Wiley.
25. Feghali, E. (1997). Arab cultural communication patterns. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 21(3), 345-378.
26. Gordoni, G. (2006). Respondents' behavior in surveys of minority-majority attitudes in divided societies: A comparison between telephone and face-to-face surveys among Arabs and Jews in Israel. PhD dissertation. Haifa University.
27. Groves, R. M. (1989). Survey errors and survey costs. New York: Wiley.
28. Groves, R. M., Fowler, F. J. Jr., Couper, M. P., Lepkowski, J. M., Singer, E., &Tourangeau, R. (2004). Survey methodology. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
29. Gudykunst, W. B., Chua, E., &Ting-Toomey, S. (1988). Culture and interpersonal communication. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
30. Hall, E. T. (1976). Beyond culture. New York: Doubleday.
31. Hall, E. T. (2000). Context and meaning. In L. A. Samovar &R. E. Porter (Eds.), Intercultural communication: A reader (9th ed). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
32. Holbrook, A. L., Green, M. C., &Krosnick, J. A. (2003). Telephone versus face-to-face interviewing of national probability samples with long questionnaires: Comparisons of respondent satisficing and social desirability response bias. Public Opinion Quarterly, 67(1), 79-125.
33. Hu, L., &Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55.
34. Johnson, T. P., O'Rourke, D., Chavez, N., Sudman, S., Warnecke, R., Lacey, L., &Horm, J. (1997). Social cognition and responses to survey questions among culturally diverse populations. In L. E. Lyberg, P. Biemer, M. Collins, E. D. De Leeuw, C. Dippo, N. Schwarz &D. Trewin (Eds.), Survey measurement and process quality (pp. 87-114). New York: Wiley.
35. Johnson, T. P., &van de Vijver, F. J. R. (2003). Social desirability in cross-cultural research. In J. A. Harkness, J. R. van de Vijver, Fons &P. P. Mohler (Eds.), Cross-cultural survey methods. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
36. Joreskog, K. G., &Goldberger, A. S. (1975). Estimation of a model with multiple indicators and multiple causes of a single latent variable. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 70(351), 631-639.
37. Kapoor, S., Hughes, P. C., Baldwin, J. R., &Blue, J. (2003). The relationship of individualism-collectivism and self-construals to communication styles in India and the United States. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 27(6), 683-700.
38. Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
39. Krosnick, J. A. (1991). Response strategies for coping with the cognitive demands of attitude measures in surveys. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 5(3), 213-236.
40. Krosnick, J. A. (1999). Survey research. Annual Review of Psychology, 50(1), 537-567.
41. Lubke, G. H., Dolan, C. V., Kelderman, H., &Mellenbergh, G. J. (2003). On the relationship between sources of within-and between-group differences and measurement invariance in the common factor model. Intelligence, 31(6), 543-566.
42. Marsh, H. W., Hau, K., &Wen, Z. (2004). In search of golden rules: Comment on hypothesis-testing approaches to setting cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler. Structural Equation Modeling, 11(3), 320-341.
43. Meredith, W. (1993). Measurement invariance, factor analysis and factorial invariance. Psychometrika, 58(4), 525-543.
44. Muthén, B. O. (1989). Latent variable modeling in heterogeneous populations. Psychometrika, 54(4), 557-585.
45. Muthén, B. O. (2002). Beyond SEM: General latent variable modeling. Behaviormetrika, 29(1), 81-117.
46. Newby, M., Amin, S., Diamond, I., &Naved, R. T. (1998). Survey experience among women in Bangladesh. American Behavioral Scientist, 42(2), 252-275.
47. Orkin, M. (1998). The politics and problematic of survey research: Political attitude studies during the transition to democracy in South Africa. American Behavioral Scientist, 42(2), 201-222.
48. Ployhart, R. E., &Oswald, F. L. (2004). Applications of mean and covariance structure analysis: Integrating correlational and experimental approaches. Organizational Research Methods, 7(1), 27-65.
49. Rensvold, R. B., &Cheung, G. W. (1998). Testing measurement models for factorial invariance: A systematic approach. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 58(6), 1017-1034.
50. Sanchez, J. I., Gomez, C., &Wated, G. (2008). A value-based framework for understanding managerial tolerance of bribery in Latin America. Journal of Business Ethics, 83(2), 341-352.
51. Satorra, A., &Bentler, P. (1988). Scaling corrections for chi-square statistics in covariance structure analysis. ASA 1988 Proceedings of the Business and Economic Statistics Section. Alexandria (pp. 308-313).
52. Schwartz, S. J., Adamson, L., Ferrer-Wreder, L., Dillon, F. R., &Berman, S. L. (2006). Identity status measurement across contexts: Variations in measurement structure and mean levels among white American, Hispanic American, and Swedish emerging adults. Journal of Personality Assessment, 86(1), 61-76.
53. Sloan, M., Wright, D., &Barrett, K. (2006). Data comparability in a mixed mode telephone and face to face survey of persons with disabilities. ASA Section on Survey Research Methods, Retrieved from http://www.amstat.org/ sections/srms/proceedings/y2006/Files/JSM2006-000812.pdf.
54. Smooha, S. (1998). Twenty years of attitudinal surveys in the Arab sector in Israel as a basis for determining trends of change of identity and political orientation. In C. Fuchs &S. Bar-Lev (Eds.), Truth and survey. Tel Aviv, Israel: Hakkibutz Hameuchad.
55. Smooha, S. (2005). Index of Arab-Jewish relations in Israel 2004. Haifa, Israel: The Jewish-Arab Center, University of Haifa/Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung.
56. Steinmetz, H., Schmidt, P., Tina-Booh, A., Wieczorek, S., &Schwartz, S. (2009). Testing measurement invariance using multigroup CFA: Differences between educational groups in human values measurement. Quality and Quantity, 43(4), 599-616.
57. Survey Research Center (2010). Guidelines for best practice in cross-cultural surveys. Ann Arbor, MI: Survey Research Center, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan. Retrieved October 10, 2010, from http://www.ccsg.isr.umich.edu/.
58. Tourangeau, R., Rips, L. J., &Rasinski, K. (2000). The psychology of survey response. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
59. Tourangeau, R., &Yan, T. (2007). Sensitive questions in surveys. Psychological Bulletin, 133, 859-883.
60. Triandis, H. C. (1994). Culture and social behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill.
61. Tucker, C., &Lepkowski, J. M. (2008). Telephone survey methods: Adapting to change. In J. M. Lepkowski, C. Tucker, J. M. Brick, E. D. de Leeuw, L. Japec &P. J. Lavrakas, et al. (Eds.), Advances in telephone survey methodology (pp. 3-26). New York: Wiley.
62. Vandenberg, R. J., &Lance, C. E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3(1), 4-70.
63. Voogt, R. J. J., &Saris, W. E. (2005). Mixed mode designs: Finding the balance between nonresponse bias and mode effects. Journal of Official Statistics, 21(3), 367-387.
64. Whitaker, B. G., &McKinney, J. L. (2007). Assessing the measurement invariance of latent job satisfaction ratings across survey administration modes for respondent subgroups: A MIMIC modeling approach. Behavior Research Methods, 39(3), 502-509.