Measurement invariance testing in questionnaires. A comparison of three Multigroup-CFA and IRT-based approaches.

Autor/inn/en	Buchholz, Janine; Hartig, Johannes
Titel	Measurement invariance testing in questionnaires. A comparison of three Multigroup-CFA and IRT-based approaches.
Quelle	In: Psychological test and assessment modelling, 62 (2020) 1, S. 29-54 PDF als Volltext Link als defekt meldenVerfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
Schlagwörter	Faktorenanalyse; Validität; Faktorenanalyse; Messung; Validität; Invarianz; Leistungsmessung; Schülerleistung; Invarianz; Messung; Leistungsmessung; Statistische Methode; PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment)
Abstract	International Large-Scale Assessments aim at comparisons of countries with respect to latent constructs such as attitudes, values and beliefs. Measurement invariance (MI) needs to hold in order for such comparisons to be valid. Several statistical approaches to test for MI have been proposed: While Multigroup Confirmatory Factor Analysis (MGCFA) is particularly popular, a newer, IRT-based approach was introduced for non-cognitive constructs in PISA 2015, thus raising the question of consistency between these approaches. A total of three approaches (MGCFA for ordinal and continuous data, multi-group IRT) were applied to simulated data containing different types and extents of MI violations, and to the empirical non-cognitive PISA 2015 data. Analyses are based on indices of the magnitude (i.e., parameter-specific modification indices resulting from MGCFA and group-specific item fit statistics resulting from the IRT approach) and direction of local misfit (i.e., standardized parameter change and mean deviation, respectively). Results indicate that all measures were sensitive to (some) MI violations and more consistent in identifying group differences in item difficulty parameters.
Erfasst von	DIPF \| Leibniz-Institut für Bildungsforschung und Bildungsinformation, Frankfurt am Main
Update	2021/4