Securing equivalence: Problems and solutions

The Handbook of Comparative Communication Research

Volumn , Issue , 2013, Pages 469-485

  Wirth, Werner ^a   Kolb, Steffen ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF FRIBOURG   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85076128973     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9780203149102-40     Document Type: Chapter

References (82)

1. Algina, J., & Penfield, R. D. (2009). Classical test theory. In R. E. Millsap & A. Maydeu-Olivares (Eds.). The SAGE handbook of quantitative methods in psychology (pp. 93-122). London: SAGE.
2. Barbeite, F. G., & Weis, E. M. (2004). Computer self-efficacy and anxiety scales for an Internet sample:Testing measurement equivalence of existing measures and development of new scales. Computers in Human Behavior, 20, 1-15.
3. Baumgartner, H., & Steenkamp, J. B. E. M. (2001). Response styles in marketing research: Across-national investigation. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(2), 143-156.
4. Baumgartner, H., & Steenkamp, J. B. E. M. (1998). Multi-group latent variable models for varying numbers of items and factors with cross-national and longitudinal applications. Marketing Letters, 9, 21-35.
5. Blair, J., & Piccinino, L. (2005). The development and testing of instruments for cross-cultural and multicultural surveys. In J. H. P. Hoffmeyer-Zlotnik & J. A. Harkness (Eds.), Methodological aspects in cross-national research: Special issue 11 of Zuma-Nachrichten (pp. 13-30). Mannheim, Germany.
6. Berry, J. W., Poortinga, Y. H., Segall, M. H., & Dasen, P. R. (2002). Cross-cultural psychology: Research and applications (2nd edition). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
7. Billiet, J. (2003). Cross-cultural equivalence with structural equation modeling. In J. A. Harkness, F. J. R. van de Vijver, & P. Ph. Mohler (Eds.), Cross-cultural survey methods (pp. 247-263). Hoboken, NJ:John Wiley.
8. Bollen, K. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley.
9. Byrne, B. M., & Campbell, T. L. (1999). Cross-cultural comparisons and the presumption of equivalent measurement and theoretical structure: A look beneath the surface. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 30, 555-574.
10. Chan, W., Ho, R. M., Leung, K., Chan, D. K.-S., & Yung, Y.-F. (1999). An alternative method for evaluating congruence coefficients with procrustes rotation: a bootstrap procedure. Psychological Methods, 4, 378-402.
11. Chang, T. K., Berg, P., Fung, A. Y.-H., Kedl, K. D., Luther, C. A., & Szuba, J (2001). Comparing nations in mass communication research, 1970-97: A critical assessment of how we know what we know. International Communication Gazette, 63, 415-434.
12. Cheung, G. W. & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 233-255.
13. Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52, 281-302.
14. Davidof, E. (2008). A cross-country and cross-time comparison of the human values measurements with the second round of the European Social Survey. Survey Research Methods, 2(1), 33-46.
15. Davidof, E., Schmidt, P., & Billiet, J. (2011). Cross-cultural analysis: Methods and applications. New York:Routledge.
16. Davidof, E., Schmidt, P., & Schwartz, S. H. (2008). Bringing values back in: The adequacy of the European Social Survey to measure values in 20 countries. Public Opinion Quarterly, 72, 420-445.
17. Davidof, E., Datler, G., Schmidt, P., & Schwartz, S. H. (2011). Testing the invariance of values in the Benelux countries with the European Social Survey: Accounting for ordinality. In E. Davidof, P. Schmidt, & J. Billiet (Eds.), Cross-cultural analysis: Methods and applications (pp. 149-171). New York: Routledge.
18. Davidof, E., Meuleman, B., Billiet, J., & Schmidt, P. (2008). Values and support for immigration: A crosscountry comparison. European Sociological Review, 24, 583-599.
19. Deth, J. W. van (1998). Equivalence in comparative research. In J. W. van Deth (Ed.), Comparative politics:The problem of equivalence (pp. 1-19). New York: Routledge.
20. De Vreese, C. H., Peter, J., & Semetko, H. A. (2001). Framing politics at the launch of the Euro: A crossnational comparative study of frames in the news. Political Communication, 18, 107-122.
21. Diamantopoulos, A., & Winklhofer, H. M. (2001). Index construction with formative indicators: An alternative to scale development. Journal of Marketing Research, 38, 269-277.
22. Esser, F., & Pfetsch, B. (Eds.) (2004). Comparing political communication: Theories, cases, and challenges. Wiesbaden, Germany: Westdeutscher Verlag.
23. Fontaine, J. R. J. (2008). Traditional and multilevel approaches in cross-cultural research: An integration of methodological frameworks. In F. J. R. van de Vijver, D. A. van Hemert, & Y. H. Poortinga (Eds.), Multilevel analysis of individuals and cultures (pp. 65-92). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.
24. Fox, J.-P., & Verhagen, J. (2011). Random item effects modeling for cross-national survey data. In E. Davidof, P. Schmidt, & J. Billiet (Eds.), Cross-cultural analysis: Methods and applications (pp. 461-482). New York: Routledge.
25. Freeze, R. D., & Raschke, R. L. (2007). An assessment of formative and reflective constructs in IS research. In H. Österle, J. Schelp, & R. Winter (Eds.), Proceedings of the 15th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS2007) (pp. 1481-1492), St. Gallen, Switzerland, University of St. Gallen.
26. Goldstein, H. (2003). Multilevel statistical models (3rd edition). London: Edward Arnold.
27. Greenfield, P. M. (1996). Culture as process: Empirical methods for cultural psychology. In J. W. Berry, Y. H. Poortinga, & J. Pandey (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural research (pp. 301-346). Boston, MA:Allyn and Bacon.
28. Hallin, D. C., & Mancini, P. (2004). Comparing media systems: Three models of media and politics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
29. Hanitzsch, T. (2007). Deconstructing journalism culture: Toward a universal theory. Communication Theory, 17, 367-385.
30. Hanitzsch, T., Amkina, M., Berganza, R., Cangoz, I., Coman, M., Hamada, B., Hanusch, F., Karadjov, C. D., Mellado, C., Moreira, S. V., Mwesige, P. G., Plaisance, P. L., Reich, Z., Seethaler, J., Skewes, E. A., Noor, D. V., & Yuen, K. W. (2010). Modeling perceived influences on journalism: Evidence from a cross-national survey of journalists. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 87, 5-22.
31. Harkness, J. A., Vijver, F. J. R. van de, & Mohler, P. Ph. (Eds.) (2003). Cross-cultural survey methods. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
32. Hemert, D. A. van, Vijver, F. J. R. van de, & Poortinga, Y. H. (2008). Multilevel models of individual and cultures: Current state and outlook. In F. J. R. van de Vijver, D. A. van Hemert, & Y. H. Poortinga (Eds.), Multilevel analysis of individuals and cultures (pp. 413-430). New York: Lawence Erlbaum.
33. Herk, H. van, Poortinga, Y. H., & Verhallen, T. M. M. (2004). Response styles in rating scales. Evidence of method bias in data from six EU countries. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 35, 346-360.
34. Herk, H. van, Poortinga, Y. H., & Verhallen, T. M. M. (2005) Equivalence of survey data. European Journal of Marketing, 3-4, 351-364.
35. Hofstede, G. H. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
36. Holland, P. W., & Wainer, H. (Eds) (1993). Different item functioning. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
37. Hui, C. H., & Triandis, H. C. (1985a). The instability of response sets. Public Opinion Quarterly, 49, 253-260.
38. Hui, C. H., & Triandis, H. C. (1985b). Measurement in cross-cultural psychology: A review and comparison of strategies. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 16, 131-152.
39. Janssen, R. (2011). Using a differential item functioning approach to investigate measurement invariance. In E. Davidof, P. Schmidt, & J. Billiet (Eds.), Cross-cultural analysis. methods and applications (pp. 415-432). New York: Routledge.
40. Jarvis, C. B., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, P. M. (2003). A critical review of construct indicators and measurement model misspecification in marketing and consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 30, 199-218.
41. Johnson, T. P. (1998). Approaches to equivalence in cross-cultural and cross-national survey research. In J. A. Harkness (Ed.), Cross-cultural survey equivalence: ZUMA Nachrichten Spezial 3 (pp. 1-40). Mannheim (Germany): ZUMA.
42. Johnson, T. P., & Vijver, F. J. R. van de (2003). Social desirability in cross-cultural research. In J. A. Harkness, F. J. R. van de Vijver, & P. Ph. Mohler (Eds.), Cross-cultural survey methods (pp. 195-204). New York: Wiley.
43. Jöreskog, K. G. (1970). A general method for analysis of covariance structures. Biometrika, 57, 239-251.
44. Kankarãs, M., Moors, G., & Vermunt, J. K. (2011). Testing for measurement invariance with latent class analysis. In E. Davidof, P. Schmidt, & J. Billiet (Eds.), Cross-cultural analysis. Methods and applications (pp. 359-384). New York: Routledge.
45. Kolb, S. (2004) Voraussetzungen für und gewinnbringende Anwendung von quasiexperimentellen Ansätzen in der kulturvergleichenden Kommunikationsforschung [Preconditions for and fruitful application of quasi-experimental designs in comparative communication research]. In W. Wirth, E. Lauf, & A. Fahr (Eds.), Forschungslogik und -design in der Kommunikationswissenschaft. Band 1, Einführung, Problematisierungen und Aspekte der Methodenlogik aus kommunikationswissenschaftlicher Perspektive [Logic and design in empirical communication design, vol. 1, Introduction, problematizations, and aspects of research logic in communications] (pp. 157-178). Cologne, Germany: Von Halem Verlag.
46. Kühne, R., Schemer, C., & Matthes, J. (in press). Messinvarianz in der komparativen Forschung: Eine Bestandsaufnahme [Measurement equivalence in comparative research: An inventory]. In B. Stark, M. Magin, O. Jandura, & M. Maurer (Eds.): Methodische Herausforderungen komparativer Forschungsansätze [Challenges in methods of comparative research approaches]. Cologne, Germany: Von Halem Verlag.
47. Landman, T. (2008). Issues and methods in comparative politics: An introduction (3rd edition). London:Routledge.
48. Lauf, E., & Peter, J. (2001). Die Codierung verschiedensprachiger Inhalte: Erhebungskonzepte und Gütemaße [Coding of content in different languages: Concepts of inquiry and quality indices]. In E. Lauf & W. Wirth (Eds.), Inhaltsanalyse: Perspektiven, Probleme, Potentiale [Content analysis: Perspectives, problems, potentialities] (pp. 199-217). Cologne, Germany: Von Halem Verlag.
49. Levine, T. R., Park, H. S., & Kim, R. K. (2007). Some conceptual and theoretical challenges fro cross-cultural communication research in the 21st century. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 36, 205-221.
50. MacCallum, R., Browne, M. (1993). The use of causal indicators in covariance structure models: Some practical issues. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 533-541.
51. Matsumoto, D., & Yoo, S. H. (2006). Toward a new generation of cross-cultural research. Perspectives of Psychological Science, 1, 234-250.
52. Matthes, J., & Kohring, M. (2008). The content analysis of media frames: Toward improving reliability and validity. Journal of Communication, 58, 258-279.
53. McCutcheon, A. (2002). Basic concepts and procedures in single- and multiple-group latent class analysis. In J. Hagenaars & A. McCutcheon (Eds.), Applied latent class analysis (pp. 56-88). Cambridge, UK:Cambridge Universitry Press.
54. Medina, T. R., Smith, S. N., & Long, J. S. (2009). Measurement models matter: Implicit assumptions and cross-national research. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 21, 333-361.
55. Mullen, M. R. (1995). Diagnosing measurement equivalence in cross-national research. Journal of International Business Studies, 26, 573-596.
56. Muthén, B. (1983). Latent variable structural equation modeling. Journal of Econometrics, 22, 43-65.
57. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2007). Mplus user’s guide. Los Angeles, CA: Author.
58. Park, H. S., Eveland, W. P. Jr., & Cudeck, R. (2008). Multilevel modeling: Studying people in context. In A. F. Hayes, M. D. Slater, & L. B. Snyder (Eds.), SAGE sourcebook of advanced data analysis (pp. 219-246). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
59. 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, 517-529.
60. Reeskens, T., & Hooghe, M. (2007). Cross cultural measurement equivalence of generalized trust. Evidence from the European Social Survey (2002 and 2004). Social Indicators Research, 85, 1-18.
61. Rodgers S., Wang, Y., Rettie, R., & Alpert, F. (2007). The web motivation inventory: replication, extension and application to Internet advertising. International Journal of Advertising, 26, 447-476.
62. Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 1-65.
63. Semetko, H. A., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2000). Framing European politics: A content analysis of press and television news. Journal of Communication, 50, 93-109.
64. Skrondal, A., & Rabe-Hesketh, S. (2004). Generalized latent variable modeling: Multilevel, longitudinal and structural equation models. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC.
65. Skrondal, A., & Rabe-Hesketh, S. (2005). Structural equation modeling: Categorical variables. In B. Everitt, & D, Howell (Ed.), Encyclopedia of statistics in behavioral science (p. 2352). London: Wiley.
66. Spini, D. (2003). Measurement equivalence of 10 value types from the Schwartz value survey across 21 countries. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 34, 3-23.
67. Steenkamp, J. B. E. M., & Baumgartner, H. (1998). Assessing measurement invariance in cross-national consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 25, 78-90.
68. Sullivan, D. M., & Ford, C. M. (2010). The alignment of measures and constructs in organizational research:The case of testing measurement models of creativity. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25, 505-521.
69. Tiele, A. (2010). Nachrichtengeographien der Tagespresse: Eine international vergleichende Nachrichtenwert-Studie [News geography in the daily newspapers: A cross-national news value study]. Berlin:Logos.
70. Triandis, H. C., & Marin, G. (1983). Etic plus emic versus pseudoetic: A test of the basic assumption of contemporary cross-cultural psychology. Journal of Consumer Research, 14, 489-500.
71. Triandis, H. C., McCusker, C., Betancourt, H., Iwao, S., Leung, K., Salazar, J. M., Setiadi, B., Sinha, J. B. P., Touzard, H., & Zaleski, Z. (1993). An etic-emic analysis of individualism and collectivism. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 24, 366-383.
72. 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, 4-69.
73. Vijver, F. J. R. van de, & Leung, K. (1997a). Methods and data analysis of cross-cultural research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
74. Vijver, F. J. R. van de, & Leung, K. (1997b). Methods and data analysis for cross-cultural research. In J. W. Berry, Y. H. Poortinga, & J. Pandey (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology (2nd edition; Vol. 1., pp. 257-300). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
75. Vijver, F. J. R. van de, & Leung, K. (2000). Methodological issues in psychological research on culture. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1, 33-51.
76. Vijver, F. J. R. van de, & Poortinga, Y. H. (2002). Structural equivalence in multilevel research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33, 141-156.
77. Vijver, F. J. R. van de, & Tanzer, N. K. (1997). Bias and equivalence in cross-cultural assessment: An overview. European Review of Applied Psychology, 4, 263-280.
78. Vijver, F. J. R. van de, Hemert, D. A. van, & Poortinga, Y. H. (2008a). Multilevel analysis of individuals and cultures. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.
79. Vijver, F. J. R. van de, Hemert, D. A. van & Poortinga, Y. H. (2008b). Conceptual issues in multilevel models. In F. J. R. van de Vijver, D. A. van Hemert, & Y. H. Poortinga (Eds.), Multilevel analysis of individuals and cultures (pp. 3-26). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.
80. Watkins, L. (2010). The cross-cultural appropriateness of survey-based value(s) research: A review of methodological issues and suggestion of alternative methodology. International Marketing Review, 27, 694-716.
81. Wirth, W., & Kolb, S. (2004). Designs and methods of comparative political communication research. In F. Esser & B. Pfetsch (Eds.), Comparing political communication: Theories, cases, and challenges (pp. 87-111). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
82. Wirth, W., & Kolb, S. (2008). Comparative research. In W. Donsbach (Ed.), The Blackwell international encyclopedia of communication (pp. 875-881). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.