Structural Equivalence in Multilevel Research

By F. V. D. van de Vijver, Y. Poortinga. 2002

237 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Applied Psychology, Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e85f3a37985aa926393e82e8384632859fa1a219

How researchers see this paper

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

In Applied Psychology

In Social Psychology

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Emotion and culture: A meta-analysis (2007, background): “It is a well-known problem in multilevel models that aggregating scores can change their meaning (Van de Vijver & Poortinga, 2002 ); validation variables can help to examine the possible shift in meaning.”
Standardization to Account for Cross-Cultural Response Bias (2004, background): “Values of .95 or higher are normally seen as indicators of good factorial agreement (Van de Vijver & Poortinga, 2002).”
A general multilevel SEM framework for assessing multilevel mediation. (2010, unknown): “Finally, aggregated Level-1 data may not always fairly represent group-level constructs (Blalock, 1979; Chou et al., 2000; Klein & Kozlowski, 2000; Krull & MacKinnon, 2001; van de Vijver & Poortinga, 2002).”
The Ecocultural Framework, Ecosocial Indices, and Psychological Variables in Cross-Cultural Research (2004, background): “Another example of dissimilar relationships at different aggregation levels, which is specifically studied in multilevel analysis (e.g., van de Vijver & Leung, 1997; van de Vijver & Poortinga, 2002), has recently been described by Myers and Diener (1996).”
Joint Impact of Interdependence and Group Diversity on Innovation (2003, methodology): “In the process of exploratory multilevel factor analysis, seperate factor analyses are carried out on the matrix of the sample means of the various items, and on the matrix of the individual deviation scores from the group mean (Van de Vijver & Poortinga, 2002).”
Evaluating Multilevel Models in Cross-Cultural Research (2006, methodology): “This study can be considered as an integrated approach to implementing the methodology addressed in van de Vijver and Leung (1997) and van de Vijver and Poortinga (2002).”
A critical analysis of cross-cultural research and testing practices: Implications for improved education and training in psychology (2009, methodology): “…van de Vijver and Poortinga (2002) contended that different constructs were needed to describe individual and country differences (see van de Vijver & Poortinga, 2002 van de Vijver, van Hemert, & Poortinga, 2008, for a description of other possible nonequivalent outcomes across individual…”
The role of cultural dimensions of international and Dutch students on academic and social integration and academic performance in the Netherlands (2013, methodology): “As a preliminary step to the empirical analysis, the two instruments SACQ and SIQ were investigated whether they measure equivalent constructs in the several country clusters (Van de Vijver & Leung, 1997, 2011; Van de Vijver & Poortinga, 2002).”
Motivational individual reaction norms underlying the Five-Factor model of personality: First steps towards a theory-based conceptual framework (2008, result): “In addition, the pattern of associations was highly similar in all cases, with congruence coefficients easily exceeding the .90 threshold for structural equivalence (van de Vijver & Poortinga, 2002).”
A Conceptual and Methodological Framework for Psychometric Isomorphism (2014, unknown): “…Dedrick & Greenbaum, 2011; Dyer et al., 2005; Fischer, Vauclair, Fontaine, & Schwartz, 2010; Gottfredson, Panter, Daye, Allen, & Wightman, 2009; Ludtke et al., 2011; B. Muthén, 1991, 1994; Reise, Ventura, Nuechterlein, & Kim, 2005; van de Vijver & Poortinga, 2002; van de Vijver & Watkins, 2006).”
Values and their Relationship to Environmental Concern and Conservation Behavior (2005, background): “The issue of equivalence of measures in crosscultural research has attracted considerable attention in recent years (Byrne & Watkins, 2003; Spini, 2003; van de Vijver & Leung, 1997; van de Vijver & Poortinga, 2002).”