Multigroup Confirmatory Factor Analysis: Locating the Invariant Referent Sets
By Brian French, W. H. Finch. 2008
122 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Food Science, Management Science and Operations Research
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f958a94d514fdfde55baad67e19ccd5ff860c628
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Food Science
- Daniel A. Sass
- E. S. Kim
- Rebecca S. Lau
- Marc H. Bornstein
- Herbert W. Marsh
- Myeongsun Yoon
- Thomas A. Schmitt
- Eunju Jung
In Management Science and Operations Research
- Daniel A. Sass
- Herbert W. Marsh
- Thomas A. Schmitt
- Alexandre J. S. Morin
- Rebecca S. Lau
- Marc H. Bornstein
- D. Putnick
- Gordon W. Cheung
Citations in the corpus
- Evaluating Model Fit With Ordered Categorical Data Within a Measurement Invariance Framework: A Comparison of Estimators (2014, methodology): “However, this study elected to implement a 1 to 1 ratio using sample sizes of 150, 300, and 500 per group to complement the work of Cheung and Rensvold (2002), French and Finch (2008), Lubke and Muthén (2004), and Meade and Lautenschlager (2004).”
- An Investigation of the Alignment Method With Polytomous Indicators Under Conditions of Partial Measurement Invariance (2018, background): “This type of simplification is often made in simulation studies of measurement invariance or DIF where either loading or threshold noninvariance is simulated (e.g., Cheung & Rensvold, 2002; French & Finch, 2008; Meade & Bauer, 2007).”
- Testing Factorial Invariance in Multilevel Data: A Monte Carlo Study (2012, unknown): “5 difference) was considered a large effect size in the factorial invariance literature (eg, French & Finch, 2008 ; Meade & Lautenschlager, 2004 ; Stark, Chernyshenko, & Drasgow, 2006 ).”
- Testing Measurement Invariance: A Comparison of Multiple-Group Categorical CFA and IRT (2011, methodology): “Although the strategies to identify the invariant referents were also introduced (French & Finch, 2008), in the reality of research, the unbiased reference variables are not likely to be apparent.”
- Comparisons of Three Empirical Methods for Partial Factorial Invariance: Forward, Backward, and Factor-Ratio Tests (2016, background): “In addition, neither study examined scalar invariance to evaluate the performance of the factor-ratio test (French & Finch, 2008) or the backward MI method (Yoon & Millsap, 2007).”
- Testing Measurement Invariance Using MIMIC (2012, methodology): “French and Finch (2008) applied the Bonferroni correction in their simulation study locating invariant reference variables in multiple-group CFA.”
- Measurement Invariance Conventions and Reporting: The State of the Art and Future Directions for Psychological Research (2016, background): “A uthor M anuscript A uthor M anuscript A uthor M anuscript A uthor M anuscript is mixed regarding their ability to correctly identify invariant and noninvariant items (French & Finch, 2008; Jung & Yoon, 2016).”
- Testing Measurement Invariance and Comparing Latent Factor Means Within a Confirmatory Factor Analysis Framework (2011, methodology): “Following the recommendations of French and Finch (2008), these reference indicators were not selected arbitrarily.”
- A Direct Comparison Approach for Testing Measurement Invariance (2012, background): “Although a recent simulation study has shown that this test can correctly identify noninvariant items (French & Finch, 2008), the repeated model estimation requirement makes the approach tedious and less attractive (Yoon & Millsap, 2007).”