Still Comparing Apples With Oranges?: Some Thoughts on the Principles and Practices of Measurement Invariance Testing

This editorial seeks to encourage European Journal of Psychological Assessment authors to take a critical approach to the use of multi-group confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) for invariance testing. The authors highlight three aspects surrounding the principles and practices of invariance testing v...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:European journal of psychological assessment : official organ of the European Association of Psychological Assessment 2018, Vol.34 (3), p.141-144
Main Authors: Greiff, Samuel, Scherer, Ronny
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Best Practices
Confirmatory Factor Analysis
Factor Analysis
Measurement
Measurement Invariance
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This editorial seeks to encourage European Journal of Psychological Assessment authors to take a critical approach to the use of multi-group confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) for invariance testing. The authors highlight three aspects surrounding the principles and practices of invariance testing via multi-group CFA: First, the application of model fit criteria to compare nested invariance models should always be evaluated considering the complexity of measurement models, the study sample, and the treatment of data. Second, standard invariance testing procedures, including multi-group CFA, have certain limitations. Third, the authors believe that the analysis of differential item functioning provides more specific information about whether certain items in a scale or test are invariant across groups or over time. This procedure can supplement more global tests of measurement invariance and thus strengthen the creation of a validity argument. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)
ISSN:1015-5759
2151-2426
DOI:10.1027/1015-5759/a000487