Grit Across Nations: The Cross-National Equivalence of the Grit-O Scale

Abstract

Despite its popularity in practice, the Grit-O Scale has shown inconsistent factorial structures and differing levels of internal consistency in samples outside the USA. The validity of the Grit-O Scale in different contexts is, therefore, questionable. As such, the purpose of this paper was to determine whether the Grit-O Scale could be used as a valid and reliable measure to compare grit across different nations. Specifically, the aim was to investigate the factorial validity, reliability, and concurrent validity of the Grit-O Scale and to investigate measurement invariance across three national cohorts (Europe, the USA, and Hong Kong). Data were gathered from 1888 respondents stemming from one USA- (n = 471), two Hong Kong- (n = 361) and four European (n = 1056) universities. A series of traditional CFA and less restrictive ESEM models were estimated and systematically compared to determine the best factorial form of the Grit-O Scale. The results showed that a bifactor ESEM model, with one general factor of overall grit and two specific factors (consistency of interest and perseverance of effort), fitted the data best, showed strong measurement invariance across the three samples, and showed itself to be a reliable measure. Furthermore, concurrent validity was established by showing that the three grit factors were directly and positively related to task performance. Meaningful latent comparisons between the three cultural cohorts could therefore be made. The results imply that cross-national comparisons of grit may only be problematic when traditional CFA approaches are favoured. In contrast, ESEM modelling approaches may compensate for cross-national differences in understanding grit and control for differences in the interpretation of the scale’s items. Therefore, the bifactor ESEM approach may be more appropriate for cross-cultural and cross-national comparison studies, as it allows for these differences to be meaningfully captured, modelled, and controlled for.

A 6-Item Family Resilience Scale (FRS6) for Measuring Longitudinal Trajectory of Family Adjustment

“…ESEM constrains the cross-loadings on non-target factors to be as close to zero as possible [ 22 ]. Researchers have recommended using ESEM as it yields more reliable results compared to CFA [ 23 ]. Based on the 3-factor CPR model of family resilience [ 3 ], a priori assumption was made that family resilience consists of three factors: Communication and Connectedness (C), Positive Framing (P), and External Resources (R).…”

The Poverty-Related Stress Scale: Development and Validation of a Multidimensional Measure Assessing Poverty-Related Stressors

“…Similarly, by allowing cross-loadings (but constrained to be as close to zero as possible), ESEM can provide more interpretable results as it permits items to be associated with factors that are theoretically relevant and practically meaningful [68]. Further, ESEM also controls for wording effects, and differences in the experience of the different stressors [69]. ESEM thus provides a more nuanced and comprehensive understanding of the underlying factors influencing poverty-based stress, leading to more reliable and valid conclusions to be drawn about the underlying factorial structure of the instrument [68].…”

“…In other words, financial distress may, for example, influence experiences of home dysfunction and noise disturbances as financial hardships make it diffi-cult to afford sufficient accommodation resources to meet basic needs. This interaction among factors cannot adequately be modeled through traditional CFA approaches, where it is assumed each factor functions in isolation from one another [69]. When allowing for cross-loadings between items and factors (constrained to be close to zero), the ESEM approach presents a more accurate representation of how poverty-related stress occurs or is experienced in realworld terms [68,69].…”

“…This interaction among factors cannot adequately be modeled through traditional CFA approaches, where it is assumed each factor functions in isolation from one another [69]. When allowing for cross-loadings between items and factors (constrained to be close to zero), the ESEM approach presents a more accurate representation of how poverty-related stress occurs or is experienced in realworld terms [68,69].…”

Structure and factorial invariance of the Grit-Original scale and convergent validity of the network with job satisfaction and happiness

“…In addition, error covariance indices were identified between items 1 and 12, as well as between items 8 and 12. More recently, another cross-cultural study conducted by Van Zyl et al (2022) , considered a sample of 471 American, 361 Hong Kong, and 1,056 European university students, where a better parsimonious structure was determined in the 11-item bifactorial model (two specific factors and one general factor), item 4 was eliminated due to low factorial saturation. In addition, multigroup invariance among the three samples was determined in this investigation with the following indicators RMSEA (Δ < 0.01) and SRMR (Δ < 0.02 for configuration vs. metric; Δ < 0.01).…”