This article describes why measurement invariance is a critical issue to quantitative theory building within the field of human resource development. Readers will learn what measurement invariance is and how to test for its presence using techniques that are accessible to applied researchers. Using data from a LibQUAL+TM study of user perceptions of service quality, we demonstrate how measurement invariance can threaten the validity of group comparison tests and ensuing theoretical conclusions. Moreover, we identify how measurement invariance can uncover important relationships in data that would otherwise go left unnoticed.
Bandura, A. ( 1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: W. H. Freeman.
2.
Brauchle, P.E., & Azam, M.S. ( 2004). Factorial invariance of the Occupational Work Ethic Inventory (OWEI). Journal of Vocational Education Research, 29(2), 121-131.
3.
Broadbooks, W.J., & Elmore, P.B. ( 1987). A Monte Carlo study of the sampling distribution of the congruence coefficient. Educational and Psychological Measurement , 47, 1-11.
4.
Cattell, R.B. ( 1978). The scientific use of factor analysis in the behavioral and life sciences. New York, NY: Plenum.
5.
Cattell, R.B., Balcar, K.R., Horn, J.L., & Nesselroade, J.R. (1969). Factor matching procedures: An improvement of the s index; with tables. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 29, 781-792.
6.
Cheung, G.W., & Rensvold, R.B. (2000). Assessing extreme and acquiescence response sets in cross-cultural research using structural equation modeling . Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 31, 187-212.
Cook, C., & Thompson, B. ( 2001). Psychometric properties of scores from the Web-based LibQUAL+TM study of perceptions of library service quality. Library Trends, 49, 585-604.
9.
Doty, D.H., & Glick, W.H. ( 1998). Common methods bias: Does common methods variance really bias results? Organizational Research Methods, 1, 374-406.
10.
Fan, X., & Thompson, B. ( 2001). Confidence intervals around score reliability coefficients, please: An EPM guidelines editorial. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 61, 517-531.
11.
Henson, R.K. ( 2001). Understanding internal consistency reliability estimates: A conceptual primer on coefficient alpha. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 34, 177-189.
12.
Henson, R.K., & Roberts, J.K. ( 2006). Use of exploratory factor analysis in published research: Common errors and some comments on improved practice. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66, 393-416.
13.
Horn, J.L., & McArdle, J.J. ( 1992). A practical and theoretical guide to measurement invariance in aging research. Journal of Experimental Aging Research , 18, 117-144.
14.
Lievens, F., Anseel, F., Harris, M.M., & Eisenberg, J. ( 2007). Measurement invariance of the Pay Satisfaction Questionnaire across three countries. Educational and Psychological Measurement , 67, 1042-1051.
15.
Lowe, P.A., & Reynolds, C.R. (2005). Factor structure of AMAS-C scores across gender among students in collegiate settings. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 65, 687-708.
16.
Lynham, S.A. ( 2000). Theory building in the human resource development profession . Human Resource Development Quarterly, 11, 159-178.
17.
Meredith, W. ( 1993). MI, factor analysis and factorial invariance. Psychometrika, 58, 525-543.
18.
Onwuegbuzie, A.J., & Daniel, L.G. ( 2003, February 19). Typology of analytical and interpretational errors in quantitative and qualitative educational research. Current Issues in Education, 6(2). Retrieved from http://cie.ed.asu.edu/volume6/number2/
19.
Reio, T.G., Jr. ( 2010). The threat of common method variance bias in theory building . Human Resource Development Review, 9, 405-411.
20.
Reynolds, C.R., & Harding, R.E. ( 1983). Outcome in two large sample studies of factorial similarity under six methods of comparison. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 43, 723-728.
21.
Reynolds, C.R., Lowe, P.A., & Saenz, A.L. ( 1999). The problem of bias in psychological assessment. In C. R. Reynolds & T. B. Gutkin (Eds.), The handbook of school psychology (3rd ed., pp. 549-595). New York, NY: Wiley.
22.
Rock, D.A., Werts, C.E., & Flaugher, R.L. (1978). The use of analysis of covariance structures for comparing the psychometric properties of multiple variables across populations. Behavioral Research, 13, 403-418.
23.
Rusticus, S.A., Hubley, A.M., & Zumbo, B.D. ( 2008). Measurement invariance on the Appearance Schemas Inventory-Revised and the Body Image Quality of Life Inventory across age and gender. Assessment, 15, 60-71.
24.
Schwaninger, M., & Grösser, S. (2008). System dynamics as model-based theory building. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 25, 447-465.
25.
Spector, P.E. ( 2006). Method variance in organizational research: Truth or urban legend? Organizational Research Methods, 9, 221-232.
26.
Steenkamp, J.-B. E. M., & Baumgartner, H. (1998). Assessing measurement invariance in cross-national consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 25, 78-90.
27.
Teo, T. ( 2010). The development, validation, and analysis of measurement invariance of the Technology Acceptance Measure for Preservice Teachers (TAMPST) . Educational and Psychological Measurement, 70, 990-1006.
28.
Thompson, B. ( 2004). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: Understanding concepts and applications. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
29.
Thompson, B., Cook, C., & Heath, F. ( 2001). How many dimensions does it take to measure users’ perceptions of libraries: A LibQUAL+TM study. portal: Libraries and the Academy, 1, 129-138.
30.
Thompson, B., Cook, C., & Thompson, R.L. (2002). Reliability and structure of LibQUAL+TM scores: Measuring perceived library service quality. portal: Libraries and the Academy, 2, 3-12.
31.
Torraco, R.J. ( 2004). Challenges and choices for theoretical research in human resource development. Human Resource Development Quarterly , 15, 171-188.
32.
Vandenberg, R.J., & Lance, C.E. ( 2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3, 4-70.
33.
Wu, A.D., Li, Z., & Zumbo, B.D. ( 2007). Decoding the meaning of factorial invariance and updating the practice of multi-group confirmatory factor analysis: A demonstration with TIMSS data. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation , 12(3). Retrieved from http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=12&n=3
34.
Zientek, L., Yetkiner, Z.E., & Thompson, B. ( 2010). Characterizing the mathematics anxiety literature using confidence intervals as a literature review mechanism. Journal of Educational Research, 103, 424-438.
