A Monte-Carlo Study of Confirmatory Factor Analytic Tests of Measurement Equivalence/Invariance

In recent years, confirmatory factor analytic (CFA) techniques have become the most common method of testing for measurement equivalence/invariance (ME/I). However, no study has simulated data with known differences to determine how well these CFA techniques perform. This study utilizes data with a variety of known simulated differences in factor loadings to determine how well traditional tests of ME/I can detect these specific simulated differences. Results show that traditional CFA tests of ME/I perform well under ideal situations but that large sample sizes, a sufficient number of manifest indicators, and at least moderate communalities are crucial for assurance that ME/I conditions exist.

[1]  J. Edwards.  The Study of Congruence in Organizational Behavior Research: Critique and a Proposed Alternative , 1994 .

[2]  Robert J. Vandenberg,et al.  A Central Question in Cross-Cultural Research: Do Employees of Different Cultures Interpret Work-related Measures in an Equivalent Manner?: , 1994 .

[3]  L. Cronbach.  Four Psychological Bulletin articles in persepctive. , 1992 .

[4]  Sandra B. Hartog,et al.  Alpha, beta, and gamma change in evaluation research: A structural equation approach. , 1988 .

[5]  S. Craig,et al.  Are performance appraisal ratings from different rating sources comparable? , 2001, The Journal of applied psychology.

[6]  Leslie A. Hayduk,et al.  LISREL Issues, Debates and Strategies , 1996 .

[7]  J. Horn,et al.  A practical and theoretical guide to measurement invariance in aging research. , 1992, Experimental aging research.

[8]  R. MacCallum,et al.  Sample size in factor analysis. , 1999 .

[9]  N. Schmitt,et al.  The Use Of Analysis Of Covariance Structures To Assess Beta And Gamma Change. , 1982, Multivariate behavioral research.

[10]  L. Cronbach,et al.  How we should measure "change": Or should we? , 1970 .

[11]  Ewald Neumann,et al.  Testing for predicted patterns: When interest in the whole is greater than in some of its parts. , 1999 .

[12]  T. Taris,et al.  Assessing Stability and Change of Psychometric Properties of Multi-Item Concepts Across Different Situations: A General Approach , 1998 .

[13]  R. Vandenberg,et al.  A Review and Synthesis of the Measurement Invariance Literature: Suggestions, Practices, and Recommendations for Organizational Research , 2000 .

[14]  B. Byrne,et al.  Testing for the equivalence of factor covariance and mean structures: The issue of partial measurement invariance. , 1989 .

[15]  W. Smith,et al.  Research management: Priorities for science in India , 2015, Nature.

[16]  J. S. Long,et al.  Testing Structural Equation Models , 1993 .

[17]  P. Bentler,et al.  Fit indices in covariance structure modeling : Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification , 1998 .

[18]  Robert J. Vandenberg,et al.  Assessing newcomers' changing commitments to the organization during the first 6 months of work , 1993 .

[19]  Ira H. Bernstein,et al.  Factoring items and factoring scales are different: Spurious evidence for multidimensionality due to item categorization. , 1989 .

[20]  Barbara M Byrne,et al.  Measurement equivalence: a comparison of methods based on confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory. , 2002, The Journal of applied psychology.

[21]  R. Vandenberg.  Toward a Further Understanding of and Improvement in Measurement Invariance Methods and Procedures , 2002 .

[22]  G. Lautenschlager,et al.  Mediators of long-term memory performance across the life span. , 1996, Psychology and aging.

[23]  Stephen G. Green,et al.  Confirmatory factor analytic procedures for assessing change during organizational entry , 1989 .

[24]  W. Meredith.  Measurement invariance, factor analysis and factorial invariance , 1993 .

[25]  Robert T. Golembiewski,et al.  Measuring Change and Persistence in Human Affairs: Types of Change Generated by OD Designs , 1976 .