Comparing RMSEA-Based Indices for Assessing Measurement Invariance in Confirmatory Factor Models

IF 2.1 3区 心理学 Q2 MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS Educational and Psychological Measurement Pub Date : 2023-11-01 DOI:10.1177/00131644231202949
Nataly Beribisky, Gregory R. Hancock
{"title":"Comparing RMSEA-Based Indices for Assessing Measurement Invariance in Confirmatory Factor Models","authors":"Nataly Beribisky, Gregory R. Hancock","doi":"10.1177/00131644231202949","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Fit indices are descriptive measures that can help evaluate how well a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) model fits a researcher’s data. In multigroup models, before between-group comparisons are made, fit indices may be used to evaluate measurement invariance by assessing the degree to which multiple groups’ data are consistent with increasingly constrained nested models. One such fit index is an adaptation of the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) called RMSEA D . This index embeds the chi-square and degree-of-freedom differences into a modified RMSEA formula. The present study comprehensively compared RMSEA D to ΔRMSEA, the difference between two RMSEA values associated with a comparison of nested models. The comparison consisted of both derivations as well as a population analysis using one-factor CFA models with features common to those found in practical research. The findings demonstrated that for the same model, RMSEA D will always have increased sensitivity relative to ΔRMSEA with an increasing number of indicator variables. The study also indicated that RMSEA D had increased ability to detect noninvariance relative to ΔRMSEA in one-factor models. For these reasons, when evaluating measurement invariance, RMSEA D is recommended instead of ΔRMSEA.","PeriodicalId":11502,"journal":{"name":"Educational and Psychological Measurement","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational and Psychological Measurement","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00131644231202949","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Fit indices are descriptive measures that can help evaluate how well a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) model fits a researcher’s data. In multigroup models, before between-group comparisons are made, fit indices may be used to evaluate measurement invariance by assessing the degree to which multiple groups’ data are consistent with increasingly constrained nested models. One such fit index is an adaptation of the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) called RMSEA D . This index embeds the chi-square and degree-of-freedom differences into a modified RMSEA formula. The present study comprehensively compared RMSEA D to ΔRMSEA, the difference between two RMSEA values associated with a comparison of nested models. The comparison consisted of both derivations as well as a population analysis using one-factor CFA models with features common to those found in practical research. The findings demonstrated that for the same model, RMSEA D will always have increased sensitivity relative to ΔRMSEA with an increasing number of indicator variables. The study also indicated that RMSEA D had increased ability to detect noninvariance relative to ΔRMSEA in one-factor models. For these reasons, when evaluating measurement invariance, RMSEA D is recommended instead of ΔRMSEA.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
基于rmsea的验证性因子模型测量不变性评价指标比较
拟合指数是描述性的措施,可以帮助评估如何很好地验证因子分析(CFA)模型适合研究人员的数据。在多组模型中,在进行组间比较之前,可以使用拟合指数通过评估多组数据与日益受限的嵌套模型的一致程度来评估测量不变性。其中一种拟合指标是对近似均方根误差(RMSEA)的适应,称为RMSEA D。该指标将卡方和自由度差异嵌入到修改后的RMSEA公式中。本研究全面比较了RMSEA D与ΔRMSEA,两个RMSEA值之间的差异与嵌套模型的比较有关。比较包括推导和使用单因素CFA模型的总体分析,其特征与实际研究中发现的特征相同。研究结果表明,对于同一模型,随着指标变量数量的增加,RMSEA D相对于ΔRMSEA的灵敏度总是增加。该研究还表明,在单因素模型中,RMSEA D相对于ΔRMSEA具有更高的检测非不变性的能力。由于这些原因,在评估测量不变性时,建议使用RMSEA D而不是ΔRMSEA。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Educational and Psychological Measurement
Educational and Psychological Measurement 医学-数学跨学科应用
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
7.40%
发文量
49
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Educational and Psychological Measurement (EPM) publishes referred scholarly work from all academic disciplines interested in the study of measurement theory, problems, and issues. Theoretical articles address new developments and techniques, and applied articles deal with innovation applications.
期刊最新文献
Investigating the Ordering Structure of Clustered Items Using Nonparametric Item Response Theory Added Value of Subscores for Tests With Polytomous Items An Ensemble Learning Approach Based on TabNet and Machine Learning Models for Cheating Detection in Educational Tests. An Illustration of an IRTree Model for Disengagement. A Relative Normed Effect-Size Difference Index for Determining the Number of Common Factors in Exploratory Solutions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1