Problems With Item Parceling for Confirmatory Factor Analytic Tests of Measurement Invariance

Combining items into parcels in confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) can improve model estimation and fit. Because adequate model fit is imperative for CFA tests of measurement invariance, parcels have frequently been used. However, the use of parcels as indicators in a CFA model can have serious detrimental effects on tests of measurement invariance. Using simulated data with a known lack of invariance, the authors illustrate how models using parcels as indicator variables erroneously indicate that measurement invariance exists much more often than do models using items as indicators. Moreover, item-by-item tests of measurement invariance were often more informative than were tests of the entire parameter matrices.

[1]  N. Schmitt,et al.  Video-based versus paper-and-pencil method of assessment in situational judgment tests: subgroup differences in test performance and face validity perceptions. , 1997, The Journal of applied psychology.

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

[3]  R. Bagozzi,et al.  A general approach to representing multifaceted personality constructs: Application to state self‐esteem , 1994 .

[4]  R E Millsap,et al.  Measurement Invariance, Predictive Invariance, and the Duality Paradox. , 1995, Multivariate behavioral research.

[5]  H. Marsh.  The Factorial Invariance of Responses by Males and Females to a Multidimensional Self-Concept Instrument: Substantive and Methodological Issues. , 1987, Multivariate behavioral research.

[6]  Sooyeon Kim,et al.  The Impact of Misspecified Item Parceling on Representing Latent Variables in Covariance Structure Modeling: A Simulation Study , 2003 .

[7]  Ke-Hai Yuan,et al.  On Averaging Variables in a Confirmatory Factor Analysis Model , 1997 .

[8]  Fritz Drasgow,et al.  Study of the measurement bias of two standardized psychological tests. , 1987 .

[9]  H. Marsh,et al.  The use of item parcels in structural equation modelling: non-normal data and small sample sizes. , 2004, The British journal of mathematical and statistical psychology.

[10]  N. Schmitt,et al.  Interindividual differences in intraindividual changes in proactivity during organizational entry: a latent growth modeling approach to understanding newcomer adaptation. , 2000, The Journal of applied psychology.

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

[12]  H. Marsh.  The Structure of Masculinity/Femininity: An Application of Confirmatory Factor Analysis to Higher-Order Factor Structures and Factorial Invariance. , 1985, Multivariate behavioral research.

[13]  Adam W. Meade,et al.  A Comparison of Item Response Theory and Confirmatory Factor Analytic Methodologies for Establishing Measurement Equivalence/Invariance , 2004 .

[14]  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 .

[15]  Jeffrey D. Facteau,et al.  Are performance appraisal ratings from different rating sources comparable? , 2001, The Journal of applied psychology.

[16]  J. Chapman,et al.  Development of young children's reading self-concepts: An examination of emerging subcomponents and their relationship with reading achievement. , 1995 .

[17]  Robert E. Ployhart,et al.  WEB‐BASED AND PAPER‐AND‐PENCIL TESTING OF APPLICANTS IN A PROCTORED SETTING: ARE PERSONALITY, BIODATA, AND SITUATIONAL JUDGMENT TESTS COMPARABLE? , 2003 .

[18]  Robert C. MacCallum,et al.  Representing sources of error in the common-factor model: Implications for theory and practice. , 1991 .

[19]  S. Finney,et al.  Item parceling issues in structural equation modeling , 2001 .

[20]  F. Drasgow.  Scrutinizing psychological tests: Measurement equivalence and equivalent relations with external variables are the central issues , 1984 .

[21]  R. Vandenberg,et al.  Multitrait-Multimethod Validation of the Satisfaction with My Supervisor Scale , 1992 .

[22]  H. Marsh,et al.  Application of confirmatory factor analysis to the study of self-concept: First- and higher order factor models and their invariance across groups. , 1985 .

[23]  Paul E. Tesluk,et al.  A Comparison of Approaches to Forming Composite Measures in Structural Equation Models , 2000 .

[24]  H W Marsh,et al.  Is More Ever Too Much? The Number of Indicators per Factor in Confirmatory Factor Analysis. , 1998, Multivariate behavioral research.

[25]  James S. Fleming,et al.  Role of Parental Motivational Practices in Children's Academic Intrinsic Motivation and Achievement. , 1994 .

[26]  K. G. J8reskoC,et al.  Simultaneous Factor Analysis in Several Populations , 2007 .

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

[28]  D. Bandalos.  The Effects of Item Parceling on Goodness-of-Fit and Parameter Estimate Bias in Structural Equation Modeling , 2002 .

[29]  Adam W. Meade,et al.  A Monte-Carlo Study of Confirmatory Factor Analytic Tests of Measurement Equivalence/Invariance , 2004 .

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

[31]  Roger E. Millsap,et al.  On the misuse of manifest variables in the detection of measurement bias , 1992 .

[32]  H. Wainer,et al.  Differential Item Functioning. , 1994 .

[33]  David Chan,et al.  The Conceptualization and Analysis of Change Over Time: An Integrative Approach Incorporating Longitudinal Mean and Covariance Structures Analysis (LMACS) and Multiple Indicator Latent Growth Modeling (MLGM) , 1998 .

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

[35]  Keith F. Widaman,et al.  Unidimensional Versus Domain Representative Parceling of Questionnaire Items: An Empirical Example , 1994 .

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

[37]  Neal Schmitt,et al.  Parameter Recovery and Model Fit Using Multidimensional Composites: A Comparison of Four Empirical Parceling Algorithms , 2004 .

[38]  R. Bagozzi,et al.  A General Approach for Representing Constructs in Organizational Research , 1998 .

[39]  Rosalie J. Hall,et al.  Item Parceling Strategies in SEM: Investigating the Subtle Effects of Unmodeled Secondary Constructs , 1999 .

[40]  Raymond B. Cattell,et al.  The Radial Parcel Double Factoring Design: A Solution to the Item-Vs-Parcel Controversy , 1975 .

[41]  T. Little,et al.  To Parcel or Not to Parcel: Exploring the Question, Weighing the Merits , 2002 .

[42]  Fadia Nasser,et al.  A Monte Carlo Study Investigating the Impact of Item Parceling on Measures of Fit in Confirmatory Factor Analysis , 2003 .

[43]  Robert E. Ployhart,et al.  Applications of Mean and Covariance Structure Analysis: Integrating Correlational and Experimental Approaches , 2004 .