A Direct Comparison Approach for Testing Measurement Invariance

By Gordon W. Cheung, Rebecca S. Lau. 2012

220 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Computer Networks and Communications, Management Science and Operations Research

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c7c4441ccdfc2f21e91bc59ff75b979e02e94f0f

How researchers see this paper

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

In Computer Networks and Communications

In Management Science and Operations Research

Citations in the corpus

Measurement Invariance Conventions and Reporting: The State of the Art and Future Directions for Psychological Research (2016, methodology): “Consequently, Cheung and colleagues (Cheung & Lau, 2012; Cheung & Rensvold, 1999; Rensvold & Cheung, 2001) described two procedures, the factor-ratio test and the stepwise portioning procedure, for testing pairs of items to identify those that are noninvariant.”
A Bifactor Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling Framework for the Identification of Distinct Sources of Construct-Relevant Psychometric Multidimensionality (2016, background): “As articulated by Cheung and Lau (2012), “One pitfall of this approach is that the CFI has no known sampling distribution and, hence, is not subject to any significance testing.”
Diversity management for all? An empirical analysis of diversity management outcomes across groups (2015, background): “However, since the χ2 and Δχ2 are sensitive to sample size, even small differences across groups can lead to a significant value of Δχ2 implying group variance (Cheung and Rensvold, 2002; Cheung and Lau, 2012).”
Assessing statistical aspects of test fairness with structural equation modelling (2013, methodology): “Cheung and Lau (2012) outlined a method for invariance testing that relies on bootstrapped confidence intervals instead of the chi-square difference test. In computer simulation studies, Meade, Johnson, and Braddy (2008) concluded that group sizes of at least 400 may be needed for adequate statistic”
Getting to Know You (2017, unknown): “Specifically, integrity appears to be the primary driver of trust decisions in highrisk contexts while individuals draw on a wider range of available cues when making decisions regarding typical work tasks (Colquitt et al.). Similarly, Jarvenpaa, Shaw, and Staples (2004) suggest that trust developme”