An approximate measurement invariance approach to within-couple relationship quality

Frontiers in Psychology

Volumn 5, Issue AUG, 2014, Pages

  Chiorri, Carlo ^a   Day, Thomas ^b   Malmberg, Lars Erik ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GENOA   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Bayesian structural equation modeling; Dyadic data; Marital satisfaction; Measurement invariance; Relationship quality

Indexed keywords

EID: 84906350360     PISSN: None     EISSN: 16641078     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00983     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Bernard, J. (1972). The Future of Marriage. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
2. Bradbury, T. N., Fincham, F. D., and Beach, S. R. H. (2000). Research on the nature and determinants of marital satisfaction: A decade in review. J. Marriage Fam. 62, 964-980. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.00964.x.
3. Bronte-Tinkew, J., Guzman, L., Jekielek, S., Moore, K. A., Ryan, S., Redd, Z., Carrano, and Matthews, G. (2004). Conceptualizing and Measuring "Healthy Marriage" for Empirical Research and Evaluation Studies: A Review of the Literature and Annotated Bibliography. Washington D.C: Child Trends, Inc. Available online at: http://www.childtrends.org/wp- content/uploads/2014/03/2003-24CHealthyMarriageLitReviewBibliographyExecSum.pdf.
4. Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Applied Research. New York: Guilford Press.
5. Burns, G. L., de Moura, M. A., Walsh, J. A., Desmul, C., Silpakit, C., and Sommers-Flanagan J. (2008). Invariance and convergent and discriminant validity between mothers' and fathers' ratings of oppositional defiant disorder toward adults, ADHD-HI, ADHD-IN, and academic competence factors within Brazilian, Thai, and American Children. Psychol. Assessment 20, 121-130. doi: 10.1037/1040-3590.20.2.121.
6. Busby, D. M. and Christensen, C. (1995). A revision of the Dyadic Adjustment Scale for use with distressed and nondistressed couples: Construct hierarchy and multidimensional scales. J. Marital Fam. Ther 21, 289-308. doi: 10.1111/j.1752-0606.1995.tb00163.x.
7. Byrne, B. M., Shavelson, R. J., and Muthén, B. O. (1989). Testing for the equivalence of factor covariance and mean structures: The issue of partial measurement invariance. Psychol. Bull. 105, 456-466. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.105.3.456.
8. Chen, F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Struct. Equ. Modeling 14, 464-504. doi: 10.1080/10705510701301834.
9. Cheung, G. W., and Rensvold, R. B. (2000). Assessing extreme and acquiescence response sets in cross-cultural research using structural equation modeling. J. Cross Cult. Psychol. 31, 187-212. doi: 10.1177/0022022100031002003.
10. Child Trends. (2003). Conceptualizing and Measuring "Healthy Marriages" for Empirical Research and Evaluation Studies: A Compendium of Measures- Part II. Washington, DC:
11. Child Trends, Inc. Available online at: http://www.childtrends.org/wp- content/uploads/2013/09/Healthy-Marriages-Part-II.pdf.
12. Fincham, F. D. (2003). Marital conflict: Correlates, structure, and context. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 12, 23-27. doi: 10.1111/1467-8721.01215.
13. Gorsuch, R. L. (1983). Factor Analysis. 2nd Edn. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
14. Grych, J. H., and Fincham, F. D. (Eds.) (2001). Interparental Conflict and Child Development: Theory, Research, and Applications. New York: Cambridge University Press.
15. Hjort, N. L., Dahl, F. A., and Steinbakk, G. H. (2006). Post-processing posterior predictive p- values. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 101, 1157-1174. doi:10.1198/016214505000001393.
16. Hochschild, A. R. (1989). The Second Shift. New York: Avon Books.
17. Jackson, J. B., Miller, R. B., Oka, M., and Henry, R. G. (2014). Gender differences in marital satisfaction: A meta-analysis. J. Marriage Fam. 76, 105-129. doi: 10.1111/jomf.12077.
18. Jones, E. (2010). "Parental relationship and parenting", in Children of the 21st Century. The First Five Years eds K. Hansen, H. Joshi and S. Dex (Bristol, UK: The Policy Press) 53-76.
19. Kenny, D. A. (1996). Models of non-independence in dyadic research. J. Soc. Pers. Relat. 13,279-294. doi: 10.1177/0265407596132007.
20. Kenny, D. A., and Cook, W. (1999). Partner effects in relationship research: Conceptual issues, analytic difficulties, and illustrations. Pers. Relationships 6, 433-448. doi: 10.1111/j.1475- 6811.1999.tb00202.x.
21. Locke, H. J., and Wallace, K. M. (1959). Short marital adjustment and prediction tests: Their reliability and validity. Marriage Fam. Living 21, 251-255. doi: 10.2307/348022.
22. Luo, S., Chen, H., Yue, G., Zhang, G., Zhaoyang, R., and Xu, D. (2008). Predicting marital satisfaction from self, partner, and couple characteristics: is it me, you, or us? J. Pers. 76, 1231-1265. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2008.00520.x.
23. Malmberg, L-E., and Flouri, E. (2011). The comparison and interdependence of maternal and paternal influences on child mental health and resilience. J. Clin. Child Adolesc. 40, 1-11. doi: 10.1080/15374416.2011.563469.
24. Marsh, H. W., Hau, K.-T., and 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's (1999) findings. Struct. Equ. Modeling 11, 320-341. doi:10.1207/s15328007sem1103_2.
25. Meredith, W. (1993). Measurement invariance, factor analysis and factorial invariance. Psychometrika 58, 525-543. doi: 10.1007/BF02294825.
26. Muthén, B. O., and Christoffersson, A. (1981). Simultaneous factor analysis of dichotomous variables in several groups. Psychometrika 46, 407-419. doi: 10.1007/BF02293798.
27. Muthén, B., and Asparouhov, T. (2012a). Bayesian SEM: a more flexible representation of substantive theory. Psychol. Methods 17, 313-335. doi: 10.1037/a0026802
28. Muthén, B., and Asparouhov, T. (2012b). New Features in Mplus v7 Lecture 3. Available online at: http://mplus.fss.uu.nl/2012/09/12/the-workshop-new-features-of-mplus-v7/
29. Muthén, B., and Asparouhov, T. (2012c). "Item response modeling in Mplus: A multi41 dimensional, multi-level, and multi-timepoint example", in Handbook of Item Response Theory: Models, Statistical Tools, and Applications eds W. J. van der Linden and R. K. Hambleton (Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC Press). Available online at: http://www.statmodel.com/download/IRT1Version2.pdf
30. Muthén, B., and Asparouhov, T. (2013). BSEM Measurement Invariance Analysis. Mplus WebNotes: No. 17. Available online at: www.statmodel.com.
31. Muthén, L. K., and Muthén, B. O. (2002). How to use a Monte Carlo study to decide on sample size and determine power. Struct. Equ. Modeling 9, 599-620. doi:10.1207/S15328007SEM0904_8.
32. Muthén, L. K.,and Muthén, B. O. (1998-2012). Mplus User's Guide. 7th Edn. Los Angeles, CA:Muthén and Muthén. Available online at: www.statmodel.com.
33. Plewis, I. ed (2007). The Millennium Cohort Study Technical Report on Sampling, 4th edition. Available online at: http://www.cls.ioe.ac.uk/library- media%5Cdocuments%5CTechnical_Report_on_Sampling_4th_Edition.pdf
34. Raykov, T. (1997). Estimation of composite reliability for congeneric measures. Appl. Psych. Meas. 21, 173-184. doi: 10.1177/01466216970212006.
35. Reynolds, J., Houlston, C., and Coleman, L. (2014). Understanding Relationship Quality. London: OnePlusOne. Available online at: http://www.oneplusone.org.uk/wp- content/uploads/2014/02/UnderstandingRelationship-Quality-by-Jenny-Reynolds-Dr- Catherine-Houlston-and-Dr-Lester-Coleman.pdf.
36. Robles, T. F., Slatcher, R. B., Trombello, J. M., and McGinn, M. M. (2014). Marital quality and health: A meta-analytic review. Psychol. Bull. 140, 140-87. doi: 10.1037/a0031859.
37. Rust, J., and Golombok, S. (1985). The Golombok-Rust inventory of sexual satisfaction (GRISS). Br .J. Clin. Psychol. 24, 63-64. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8260.1985.tb01314.x.
38. Rust, J., and Golombok, S. (2010). The Golombok Rust inventory of marital state: A reflection. Sex. Relat. Ther. 25, 54-56, doi: 10.1080/14681990903563715.
39. Rust, J., Bennun, I., Crowe, M. and Golombok, S. (1986). The Golombok Rust inventory of marital state (GRIMS). Sex. Marital Ther. 1, 55-60. doi: 10.1080/02674658608407680.
40. Rust, J., Bennun, I., Crowe, M. and Golombok, S. (1990). The GRIMS. A psychometric instrument for the assessment of marital discord. J. Fam. Ther. 12, 45-57. doi: 2410.1046/j..1990.00369.x. 25
41. Satorra, A., and Bentler, P. M. (2001). A scaled difference chi-square test statistic for momen structure analysis. Psychometrika 66, 507-514. doi: 10.1007/BF02296192. 27
42. Shapiro, A. F., Gottman, J. M., and Carrère, S. (2000). The baby and the marriage: Identifying factors that buffer against decline in marital satisfaction after the first baby arrives. J. Fam. 29 Psychol. 14, 59-70. doi: 10.1037//0893-3200.14.1.59.
43. South, S. C., Krueger, R. F., and Iacono, W. G. (2009). Factorial invariance of the Dyadic Adjustment Scale across gender. Psychol. Assessment 21, 622-628. doi: 10.1037/a0017572.
44. Spanier, G. B. (1976). Measuring dyadic adjustment: New scales for assessing the quality of marriage and similar dyads. . J. Marriage Fam. 38,15-28. doi:10.2307/350547.
45. van de Schoot, R., Kluytmans, A., Tummers, L., Lugtig, P., Hox, J., and Muthén B. (2013).Facing off with Scylla and Charybdis: a comparison of scalar, partial, and the novel possibility of approximate measurement invariance. Front. Psychol. 4:770. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00770.
46. van de Schoot, R., Lugtig, P., and Hox, J. (2012). A checklist for testing measurement invariance. Eur. J. Dev. Psychol. 9, 486-492. doi: 10.1080/17405629.2012.686740.