Researchers commonly compare means and other statistics across groups with little concern for whether the measure possesses strong factorial invariance (i.e., equal factor loadings and intercepts/thresholds). When this assumption is violated, inaccurate inferences associated with statistical and practical significance can occur. This manuscript emphasizes the importance of testing for measurement invariance (MI) and provides guidance when conducting these tests. Topics discussed are potential causes of noninvariant items, the difference between measurement bias and invariance, remedies for noninvariant measures, and considerations associated with model estimation. Using a sample of 491 teachers, a demonstration is also provided that evaluates whether a newly constructed behavior and instructional management scale is invariant across elementary and middle school teachers. Analyses revealed that the results differ slightly based on the estimation method utilized although these differences did not greatly influence the latent factor mean difference conclusions. Additional implications and considerations related to invariance testing are discussed.

No abstract

Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) has long been used in the social sciences to depict the relationships between variables/items and latent traits. Researchers face many choices when using EFA, including the choice of rotation criterion, which can be difficult given that few research articles have discussed and/or demonstrated their differences. The goal of the current study is to help fill this gap by reviewing and demonstrating the utility of several rotation criteria. Furthermore, this article discusses and demonstrates the importance of using factor pattern loading standard errors for hypothesis testing. The choice of a rotation criterion and the use of standard errors in evaluating factor loadings are essential so researchers can make informed decisions concerning the factor structure. This study demonstrates that depending on the rotation criterion selected, and the complexity of the factor pattern matrix, the interfactor correlations and factor pattern loadings can vary substantially. It is also illustrated that the magnitude of the factor loading standard errors can result in different factor structures. Implications and future directions are discussed.

No abstract

Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) is a commonly used statistical technique for examining the relationships between variables (e.g., items) and the factors (e.g., latent traits) they depict. There are several decisions that must be made when using EFA, with one of the more important being choice of the rotation criterion. This selection can be arduous given the numerous rotation criteria available and the lack of research/literature that compares their function and utility. Historically, researchers have chosen rotation criteria based on whether or not factors are correlated and have failed to consider other important aspects of their data. This study reviews several rotation criteria, demonstrates how they may perform with different factor pattern structures, and highlights for researchers subtle but important differences between each rotation criterion. The choice of rotation criterion is critical to ensure researchers make informed decisions as to when different rotation criteria may or may not be appropriate. The results suggest that depending on the rotation criterion selected and the complexity of the factor pattern matrix, the interpretation of the interfactor correlations and factor pattern loadings can vary substantially. Implications and future directions are discussed.