The Issue Of Measurement Invariance Revisited

By Barbara M. Byrne, D. Watkins. 2003

484 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Clinical Psychology, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/494efb591f01342679f3beb5f9f9c36e61bc1d37

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Clinical Psychology

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Testing for Measurement and Structural Equivalence in Large-Scale Cross-Cultural Studies: Addressing the Issue of Nonequivalence (2010, background): “…methodologists, together with relevant pedagogical papers on the topic (e.g., Byrne, 2003; Byrne & Campbell, 1999; Byrne & Stewart, 2006; Byrne & Watkins, 2003; Ryan, Chan, Ployhart, & Slade, 1999), there remains little evidence of SEM application to tests for equivalence in the…”
What happens if we compare chopsticks with forks? The impact of making inappropriate comparisons in cross-cultural research. (2008, background): “Measurement invariance is an important issue if a researcher wishes to make group comparisons (e.g., Byrne & Watkins, 2003; Reise, Widaman, & Pugh, 1993; Riordan & Vanderberg, 1994; Van de Vijver & Leung, 1997; Widaman & Reise, 1997).”
Antecedents and consequences of approach and avoidance achievement goals: A test of gender invariance (2008, background): “Structural equivalence, by contrast, refers to the degree to which the relationships among the latent variables are similar in each group (Byrne & Watkins, 2003).”
A critical analysis of cross-cultural research and testing practices: Implications for improved education and training in psychology (2009, methodology): “Using analysis of covariance, cross-cultural performance differences no longer were significant after correction for differences in pronunciation speed (see van de Vijver & Leung, 1997, for details related to these small sample procedures; Byrne & Watkins, 2003, for an illustrated application).”
Validation of the Satisfaction with Life Scale to Brazilians: Evidences of Measurement Noninvariance Across Brazil and US (2013, background): “Despite the difficulty of knowing why nonequivalence exists across samples, experts (van de Vijver and Hambleton 1996; Byrne and Watkins 2003) suggest that it could be due to construct bias, method bias, or item bias.”
Value Orientations From the World Values Survey (2016, background): “Complete equivalence of survey questions might be impossible to achieve cross-nationally (Byrne & Watkins, 2003).”
A longitudinal analysis of citizens' attitudes about police (2010, methodology): “When such a small portion of cases are missing, list-wise deletion is a proper method (Byrne and Watkins, 2003).”
Female and male antisocial trajectories: From childhood origins to adult outcomes (2008, background): “Technically, MI refers to the invariant operation of items over time or across samples; that is, the extent to which item content is being perceived and interpreted exactly the same way across time or across groups (Byrne & Watkins, 2003).”
The Assessment of Psychological Strain in Work Contexts: Concerning the Structural Equivalency of Ni (2006, background): “…using different items in different cultures to measure the same construct (Triandis & Marin, 1983), aiming for structural equivalency as sufficient to ensure cross-cultural equivalency (Paunonen & Ashton, 1998), or taking metric invariance as the only satisfactory criterion (Byrne & Watkins, 2003).”
Modern and Old-fashioned Homonegativity Among Samples of Canadian and American University Students (2009, background): “Tests of invariance enable researchers to establish whether components of the measurement model, or the structural model, or both, are invariant (i.e., equivalent) across particular groups (Byrne, 2004; Byrne & Campbell, 1999; Byrne & Watkins, 2003).”
A Short Version of the Occupational Self-Efficacy Scale: Structural and Construct Validity Across Five Countries (2008, background): “Others have argued the need for invariant measurement errors (e.g., Byrne & Watkins, 2003), and some have even claimed equal intercepts between groups or situations to be necessary (e.g., Chan, 2000).”
Teacher's Corner: Testing Measurement Invariance of Second-Order Factor Models (2005, unknown): “Tests of measurement invariance are an important issue if the researcher wishes to make group comparisons (e.g., Byrne & Watkins, 2003; Reise, Widaman, & Pugh, 1993; Van de Vijver & Leung, 1997; Widaman & Reise, 1997).”
Application of the scenario questionnaire of horizontal and vertical individualism and collectivism to the assessment of cultural distance and cultural fit (2005, unknown): “…various statistical techniques are used to ensure measurement equivalence of the scales and to draw conclusions about the cross-cultural comparability of constructs (Byrne & Watkins, 2003; Cheung & Rensvold, 2000; Ghorpade, Hattrup, & Lackritz, 1999; Spini, 2003; Steenkamp & Baumgartner, 1998).”