Testing for Measurement and Structural Equivalence in Large-Scale Cross-Cultural Studies: Addressing the Issue of Nonequivalence

A critical assumption in cross-cultural comparative research is that the instrument measures the same construct(s) in exactly the same way across all groups (i.e., the instrument is measurement and structurally equivalent). Structural equation modeling (SEM) procedures are commonly used in testing t...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:International journal of testing 2010-04, Vol.10 (2), p.107-132
Main Authors: Byrne, Barbara M., van de Vijver, Fons J. R.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Algeria
Bias
Brazil
Bulgaria
Canada
Chile
College Students
Comparative Analysis
Cross Cultural Studies
cross-cultural research
Crosscultural studies
Cyprus
Equivalence
Factor Structure
Family values
Foreign Countries
France
Georgia Republic
Germany
Ghana
Greece
Hong Kong
India
Indonesia
Iran
Japan
large-scale studies
Measurement
measurement equivalence
Measures (Individuals)
Mexico
Netherlands
Nigeria
Pakistan
Saudi Arabia
South Korea
Spain
Statistical Bias
structural equation modeling
Structural Equation Models
Turkey
Ukraine
Undergraduate students
United Kingdom
United States
Validity
Values
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:A critical assumption in cross-cultural comparative research is that the instrument measures the same construct(s) in exactly the same way across all groups (i.e., the instrument is measurement and structurally equivalent). Structural equation modeling (SEM) procedures are commonly used in testing these assumptions of multigroup equivalence. However, when comparisons comprise large-scale cross-cultural studies, the standard SEM strategy can be extremely problematic both statistically and substantively. Based on responses to a 14-item version of the Family Values Scale ( Georgas, 1999 ) by 5,482 university students from 27 nations around the globe, we describe and illustrate these difficulties. We propose and report on a dual modal two-pronged strategy that focuses on countries as well as scale items in determining the possible sources of bias. Suggestions for minimizing problems in tests for multigroup equivalence in large-scale cross-cultural studies are proffered.
ISSN:1530-5058
1532-7574
DOI:10.1080/15305051003637306