Other formats:
BibTeX
LaTeX
RIS
@article{1837030, author = {Lacko, David and Čeněk, Jiří and Točík, Jaroslav and Avsec, Andreja and Đorđević, Vladimir and Genc, Ana and Haka, Fajtona and ŠakotićandKurbalija, Jelena and Mohorić, Tamara and Neziri, Ibrahim and Subotić, Siniša}, article_number = {2–3}, doi = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/10693971211068971}, keywords = {Cross-cultural research; measurement invariance; equivalence; individualism and collectivism; scalar invariance}, language = {eng}, issn = {1069-3971}, journal = {Cross-Cultural Research}, title = {The Necessity of Testing Measurement Invariance in Cross-Cultural Research: Potential Bias in Cross-Cultural Comparisons With Individualism– Collectivism Self-Report Scales}, url = {https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/10693971211068971}, volume = {56}, year = {2022} }
TY - JOUR ID - 1837030 AU - Lacko, David - Čeněk, Jiří - Točík, Jaroslav - Avsec, Andreja - Đorđević, Vladimir - Genc, Ana - Haka, Fajtona - Šakotić-Kurbalija, Jelena - Mohorić, Tamara - Neziri, Ibrahim - Subotić, Siniša PY - 2022 TI - The Necessity of Testing Measurement Invariance in Cross-Cultural Research: Potential Bias in Cross-Cultural Comparisons With Individualism– Collectivism Self-Report Scales JF - Cross-Cultural Research VL - 56 IS - 2–3 SP - 228–267 EP - 228–267 SN - 10693971 KW - Cross-cultural research KW - measurement invariance KW - equivalence KW - individualism and collectivism KW - scalar invariance UR - https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/10693971211068971 N2 - Individualism and collectivism are some of the most widely applied concepts in cultural and cross-cultural research. They are commonly applied by scholars who use arithmetic means or sum indexes of items on a scale to examine the potential similarities and differences in samples from various countries. For many reasons, cross-cultural research implicates numerous methodological and statistical pitfalls. The aim of this article is to summarize some of those pitfalls, particularly the problem of measurement non-invariance, which stems from the different understandings of questionnaire items or even different character of constructs between countries. This potential bias is reduced by latent mean comparisons performed with Multigroup Confirmatory Factor Analysis and the Measurement Invariance procedure within a Structural Equation Modeling framework. These procedures have been neglected by many researchers in the field of cross-cultural psychology, however. In this article, we compare ‘traditional’ (comparison of arithmetic means) and ‘invariant’ (latent mean comparison) approaches and provide necessary R source codes for replications of measurement invariance and latent mean comparisons within other scales. Both approaches are demonstrated with real data gathered on an Independent and Interdependent Self-Scale from 1386 participants across six countries (Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Macedonia and Albania). Our results revealed considerable differences between the ‘invariant’ and ‘traditional’ approaches, especially in post-hoc analyses. Since ‘invariant’ results can be considered less biased, this finding suggests that the currently prevalent method of comparing the arithmetic means of cross-cultural scales of individualism and collectivism can potentially cause biased results. ER -
LACKO, David, Jiří ČENĚK, Jaroslav TOČÍK, Andreja AVSEC, Vladimir $\{\backslash$DJ$\}$OR$\{\backslash$DJ$\}$EVI$\backslash$'C, Ana GENC, Fajtona HAKA, Jelena ŠAKOTI$\backslash$'C-KURBALIJA, Tamara MOHORI$\backslash$'C, Ibrahim NEZIRI and Siniša SUBOTI$\backslash$'C. The Necessity of Testing Measurement Invariance in Cross-Cultural Research: Potential Bias in Cross-Cultural Comparisons With Individualism– Collectivism Self-Report Scales. \textit{Cross-Cultural Research}. 2022, vol.~56, 2–3, p.~228–267. ISSN~1069-3971. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/10693971211068971.
|