scholarly journals Analyzing Measurement Invariance of the Students’ Engagement Instrument Brief Version: The Cases of Denmark, Finland, and Portugal

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 297-313 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. E. Virtanen ◽  
P. Moreira ◽  
H. Ulvseth ◽  
H. Andersson ◽  
S. Tetler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Student Engagement ◽  
Measurement Invariance ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
School Contexts ◽  
Invariance Testing ◽  
National School ◽  
Cultural Research ◽  
Cross Cultural Research ◽  
Different Levels ◽  
Cross National

The promotion of students’ engagement with school is an internationally acknowledged challenge in education. There is a need to examine the structure of the concept of student engagement and to discover the best practices for fostering it across societies. That is why the cross-cultural invariance testing of students’ engagement measures is highly needed. This study aimed, first, to find the reduced set of theoretically valid items to represent students’ affective and cognitive engagement forming the Brief-SEI (brief version of the Student Engagement Instrument; SEI). The second aim was to test the measurement invariance of the Brief-SEI across three countries (Denmark, Finland, and Portugal). A total of 4,437 seventh-grade students completed the SEI questionnaires in the three countries. The analyses revealed that of the total 33 original instrument items, 15 items indicated acceptable psychometric properties of the Brief-SEI. With these 15 items, cross-national factorial validity and invariances across genders and students with different levels of academic performance (samples from Finland and Portugal) were demonstrated. This article discusses the utility of the Brief-SEI in cross-cultural research and its applicability in different national school contexts.

scholarly journals Testing measurement invariance across groups: applications in cross-cultural research.

2010 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 111-130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Taciano L. Milfont ◽  
Ronald Fischer
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Measurement Invariance ◽  
Psychological Research ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Methodological Issues ◽  
Psychological Variables ◽  
Invariance Testing ◽  
Cultural Research ◽  
Confirmatory Factor ◽  
Cross Cultural Research

Researchers often compare groups of individuals on psychological variables. When comparing groups an assumption is made that the instrument measures the same psychological construct in all groups. If this assumption holds, the comparisons are valid and differences/similarities between groups can be meaningfully interpreted. If this assumption does not hold, comparisons and interpretations are not fully meaningful. The establishment of measurement invariance is a prerequisite for meaningful comparisons across groups. This paper first reviews the importance of equivalence in psychological research, and then the main theoretical and methodological issues regarding measurement invariance within the framework of confirmatory factor analysis. A step-by-step empirical example of measurement invariance testing is provided along with syntax examples for fitting such models in LISREL.

On Detecting Systematic Measurement Error in Cross-Cultural Research: A Review and Critical Reflection on Equivalence and Invariance Tests

2018 ◽  
Vol 49 (5) ◽  
pp. 713-734 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diana Boer ◽  
Katja Hanke ◽  
Jia He
Keyword(s):  
Content Analysis ◽  
Measurement Error ◽  
Cultural Influences ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Systematic Measurement ◽  
Invariance Testing ◽  
Systematic Measurement Error ◽  
Cultural Research ◽  
Cross Cultural Research ◽  
Current Practices

One major threat to revealing cultural influences on psychological states or processes is the presence of bias (i.e., systematic measurement error). When quantitative measures are not targeting the same construct or they differ in metric across cultures, the validity of inferences about cultural variability (and universality) is in doubt. The objectives of this article are to review what can be done about it and what is being done about it. To date, a multitude of useful techniques and methods to reduce or assess bias in cross-cultural research have been developed. We explore the limits of invariance/equivalence testing and suggest more flexible means of dealing with bias. First, we review currently available established and novel methods that reveal bias in cross-cultural research. Second, we analyze current practices in a systematic content analysis. The content analysis of more than 500 culture-comparative quantitative studies (published from 2008 to 2015 in three outlets in cross-cultural, social, and developmental psychology) aims to gauge current practices and approaches in the assessment of measurement equivalence/invariance. Surprisingly, the analysis revealed a rather low penetration of invariance testing in cross-cultural research. Although a multitude of classical and novel approaches for invariance testing is available, these are employed infrequent rather than habitual. We discuss reasons for this hesitation, and we derive suggestions for creatively assessing and handling biases across different research paradigms and designs.

scholarly journals Compiling Measurement Invariant Short Scales in Cross–Cultural Personality Assessment Using Ant Colony Optimization

2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 470-485 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristin Jankowsky ◽  
Gabriel Olaru ◽  
Ulrich Schroeders
Keyword(s):  
Ant Colony Optimization ◽  
Measurement Invariance ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Sampling Procedure ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Ant Colony ◽  
Implicit Assumption ◽  
Cultural Research ◽  
Cross Cultural Research ◽  
Item Sampling

Examining the influence of culture on personality and its unbiased assessment is the main subject of cross–cultural personality research. Recent large–scale studies exploring personality differences across cultures share substantial methodological and psychometric shortcomings that render it difficult to differentiate between method and trait variance. One prominent example is the implicit assumption of cross–cultural measurement invariance in personality questionnaires. In the rare instances where measurement invariance across cultures was tested, scalar measurement invariance—which is required for unbiased mean–level comparisons of personality traits—did not hold. In this article, we present an item sampling procedure, ant colony optimization, which can be used to select item sets that satisfy multiple psychometric requirements including model fit, reliability, and measurement invariance. We constructed short scales of the IPIP–NEO–300 for a group of countries that are culturally similar (USA, Australia, Canada, and UK) as well as a group of countries with distinct cultures (USA, India, Singapore, and Sweden). In addition to examining factor mean differences across countries, we provide recommendations for cross–cultural research in general. From a methodological perspective, we demonstrate ant colony optimization's versatility and flexibility as an item sampling procedure to derive measurement invariant scales for cross–cultural research. © 2020 The Authors. European Journal of Personality published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Association of Personality Psychology

COVID-19 A Cultural Analysis to Understand Variance in Infection Rate across Nations

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ratan Dheer ◽  
Carolyn Egri ◽  
Len J. Treviño
Keyword(s):  
Infection Rate ◽  
Cultural Analysis ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Cultural Value ◽  
National Data ◽  
Government Effectiveness ◽  
Cultural Research ◽  
Cross Cultural Research ◽  
Social Restriction ◽  
Cross National

We integrate insights from cross-cultural research with inquiry in social psychology to develop a theoretically grounded and culturally derived explanation of the cross-national variance in COVID-19 infections. Specifically, we draw on Hofstede's (1984) and Schwartz' (1999) cultural value frameworks to elucidate how dimensions resulting from these explain differences in individual’s behavior in response to social distancing and social restriction guidelines, thereby mitigating the infection rate of COVID-19 cross-nationally. Our analysis, based on cross-national data, and after controlling for differences in government effectiveness, GDP per capita and population density, suggest that while individualism, indulgence, autonomy, and egalitarianism positively predicted COVID-19 cases across nations, power distance negatively predicted the number of COVID-19 cases cross nationally.

Consequences of Not Conducting Measurement Invariance Tests in Cross-Cultural Studies: A Review of Current Research Practices and Recommendations

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 466-483
Author(s):  
Shinhee Jeong ◽  
Yunsoo Lee
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Confirmatory Factor Analysis ◽  
Human Resource Development ◽  
Measurement Invariance ◽  
Human Resource ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Measurement Models ◽  
Cultural Research ◽  
Confirmatory Factor ◽  
Cross Cultural Research

The Problem Cross-cultural research has received substantial attention from both academia and practice as it contributes to expand current theory and implements culturally successful human resource strategies. Although the quantity of this type of research has increased, several researchers have raised methodological concerns that the majority of cross-cultural research has simply assumed or ignored measurement invariance. The Solution In this article, we first provide the meaning for measurement invariance, discuss why it is important, and then explain stepwise confirmatory factor analysis procedures to test measurement invariance. We also diagnose the current research practice in the field of human resource development (HRD) based on a review of cross-cultural, comparative research published in the major HRD journals. Finally, we demonstrate that the group difference test results that have been found without ensuring measurement invariance can, in fact, be false. The Stakeholders This article contributes to the HRD literature and practice in two ways. First, HRD researchers are invited to recognize the importance of sophisticated research methodology, such as measurement invariance, and to examine item bias across different groups so they can make a meaningful and valid comparison. The same attention is advisable to any practitioner who attempts to identify group differences using multinational/cultural data. This article also provides HRD scholars and practitioners with specific multigroup confirmatory factor analysis (MGCFA) procedures to facilitate empirical tests of measurement models across different groups and thus disseminate the methodological advances in the field of HRD. It is our hope that the present article raises awareness, circulates relevant knowledge, and encourages more HRD scholars to think critically about measurement.

Linguistic Equivalence, Construct Validity, But Lack Measurement Invariance: An Illustration of Challenges in Cross-Cultural Research on Adolescent Adjustment

2020 ◽  
Vol 54 (4) ◽  
pp. 323-345 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tony Xing Tan ◽  
Zhiyao Yi ◽  
Eunsook Kim ◽  
Zhengjie Li ◽  
Ke Cheng
Keyword(s):  
Construct Validity ◽  
Measurement Invariance ◽  
Behavioral Assessment ◽  
Negative Attitude ◽  
The United States ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Adolescent Adjustment ◽  
Cultural Research ◽  
Cross Cultural Research

In this study, we illustrated issues related to measure invariance in cross-cultural research involving instrument translation between Chinese and English. We translated and back-translated the third edition of the Behavioral Assessment for Children-Self Report of Personality (BASC-3-SRP) and administered it to 1,574 youth in China and 512 youth in the United States. We found that despite a rigorous approach to achieving linguistic equivalence, statistically demonstrating acceptable internal consistency and construct validity, measurement invariance tests revealed that six of the 16 BASC-3-SRP subscales lacked measurement invariance. Constructs for the first three of the six subscales that lacked measurement invariance (i.e., Negative Attitude toward School, Negative Attitude toward Teachers, and Self-Esteem) are known to be conceptualized differently in collectivistic societies, while constructs for the second three subscales (i.e., Atypicality, Sense of Inadequacy, and Hyperactivity) lacked measurement invariance without known cultural reasons. These results highlight instrument development issues and measurement variance issues that cross-cultural researchers must grapple with.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document