2019
DOI: 10.1080/10705511.2019.1602776
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Multiple-Group Invariance with Categorical Outcomes Using Updated Guidelines: An Illustration Using Mplus and the lavaan/semTools Packages

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
255
0
20

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 293 publications
(275 citation statements)
references
References 41 publications
0
255
0
20
Order By: Relevance
“…Measurement invariance according to Svetina and Rutkowski [39] was tested in order to establish that the scale measures the same for both the older and younger age group and for both sexes. Since the observed means equal the intercept/thresholds of the variable added together with the factor loadings times the factor score, it is in theory possible for the intercept/thresholds to be unequal resulting in elevated or attenuated observed means for different groups giving biased observed means [40].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Measurement invariance according to Svetina and Rutkowski [39] was tested in order to establish that the scale measures the same for both the older and younger age group and for both sexes. Since the observed means equal the intercept/thresholds of the variable added together with the factor loadings times the factor score, it is in theory possible for the intercept/thresholds to be unequal resulting in elevated or attenuated observed means for different groups giving biased observed means [40].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Measurement invariance was assessed by comparing the final CFA model between girls who reported using only disposable sanitary pads at home, with others. We tested for threshold and loading invariance, using the updated guidance for multigroup CFA for ordinal data 33 34…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We then conducted invariance analyses on the sixfactor model in Table 3, we present the results of measurement invariance by sex and age, although these groups were smaller than ideal for this type of analysis. Following the recommendations for measurement invariance analyses, with ordered categorical data (Svetina et al, 2020;Wu & Estabrook, 2016), we tested for configural/threshold invariance, threshold and loading invariance, and threshold, loading, and intercept invariance, in that order. As can be seen in the table, model fit did not decrease substantially with increasing constraints, supporting intercept invariance.…”
Section: Preliminary Analysesmentioning
confidence: 99%